Newly obtained emails confirm that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) changed its definition for both “vaccine” and “vaccinated” because people were pointing out that definitions didn’t seem to apply to the COVID-19 vaccines.
“The definition of vaccine we have posted is problematic and people are using it to claim the COVID-19 vaccine is not a vaccine based on our own definition,” Alycia Downs, a CDC official, wrote in an email on Aug. 25, 2021, to a colleague.
“Vaccine” was defined since at least 2011 by the CDC as a product that triggers immunity, while “vaccination” was described as an injection that prevents a disease, according to archived versions of the page. However, a flood of inquiries on the definitions was triggered by the fact that the COVID-19 vaccines have been increasingly ineffective against infection by the virus that causes COVID-19, the emails show.
“Our question is how is the CDC and the rest of the world allowed to call the shot a vaccination when it doesn’t even meet your own definition,” one person wrote to the CDC.
“Right-wing covid-19 pandemic deniers are using your ‘vaccine’ definition to argue that mRNA vaccines are not vaccines,” another said.
The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are both built on messenger RNA technology. They are two of the three COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States.
Downs and colleagues Allison Michelle Fisher, Cynthia Jorgensen, Valerie Morelli, and Andrew (no last name given) worked on changing the definitions for “vaccine” and “vaccination,” according to the emails.
The changes were pushed through on Aug. 31, 2021, and Sept. 1, 2021, respectively.
Changing Definitions
“Vaccine” is now defined as “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.”
The previous definition was “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.”
“Vaccination” was changed to “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease” from “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
Attorney Travis Miller obtained some of the missives in 2021 and published screenshots of them. At the time, the CDC didn’t dispute their authenticity. The Epoch Times has obtained the emails, and additional messages concerning the changes, and has published all 67 pages of them.
The batch of emails, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, also shows that Andrew, a CDC employee on the agency’s Vaccine Task Force, boosted a Washington Post article that downplayed criticism of the change.
“I’ve only seen a couple of inquiries about the change to this page. I think the WaPo article explains the problem well—that people are misinterpreting ‘immunity’ to mean 100% protection,” Andrew wrote.
“Thank you, Andrew! I really appreciate your response,” Downs replied.
A CDC spokesperson has told The Epoch Times that the “slight changes in wording” haven’t altered “the overall definition,” of “vaccine,” adding, “the previous definition at Immunization Basics | CDC could be interpreted to mean that vaccines were 100% effective, which has never been the case for any vaccine, so the current definition is more transparent, and also describes the ways in which vaccines can be administered.”
Some other portions of the CDC website still say COVID-19 vaccines confer immunity. One page, for instance, says that “getting a COVID-19 vaccination is a safer and more dependable way to build immunity to COVID-19 than getting sick with COVID-19.”
Decision to not get COVID-19 vaccine comes with consequences, but maybe not for the health care system
A large-scale international study of those unvaccinated against COVID-19 finds a pattern of discrimination—and a relatively low hospitalization rate.
While the study’s findings are limited by the nature of the selection process, in which unvaccinated people opted in to participate, the new study suggests that those who declined the vaccine may not be the burden to the health care system many have claimed them to be. The study is now available as a preprint (which means it hasn’t yet been peer-reviewed). It was uploaded to ResearchGate earlier this month.
The findings hold significant importance to policymakers. According to Our World in Data, 60 percent of the world is fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The 40 percent who aren’t vaccinated against the virus have been frequently blamed for the duration and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, even as vaccination rates reached up to 90 percent in many jurisdictions.
With government agencies, news media, and social media algorithms ignoring or misrepresenting the contending science around COVID-19, the unvaccinated have faced often intense pressure to get vaccinated against COVID-19.
“What the survey aimed to do is gather insights about health outcomes, choices, and discrimination experienced by the marginalized subpopulation of people from diverse socio-economic backgrounds, ethnicities, and cultures who have elected to exercise their right of refusal of COVID-19 injections,” the study authors said.
In many places in the United States, those who declined the COVID-19 vaccines have been discriminated against, stigmatized, and marginalized from society. Nurses and health care workers were fired, Air Force cadets were denied commissions, and family members found themselves ostracized within some of their most intimate and important relationships.
The vilification of the unvaccinated has come with the censorship of both science and personal experience. Many doctors, nurses, scientists, and other health care professionals who speak out about the safety and necessity of these vaccines have been threatened with the loss of their medical licenses, deleted from social media, canceled from events with their peers, and fired from their jobs.
The Control Group
The study is based on data collected from the Control Group Cooperative (CGC), which was founded in July 2021 by a citizens group in the UK to represent and connect people who elected to not get the COVID-19 vaccines.
The goal of the CGC has been to analyze the long-term health outcomes and experiences of these individuals through self-reported surveys. According to their website, there are currently more than 300,000 unvaccinated participants from more than 175 countries participating in their long-term study.
The study was conducted by Robert Verkerk, founder of the Alliance for Natural Health International, an affiliate of the CGC. A team of international scientists contributed to the research. The study analyzes the data from the CGC survey from the first five months of its operation—from September 2021 through February.
The Cohort
The cohort analyzed by Verkerk consisted of 18,497 individuals out of the 297,618 people who had joined the CGC by the end of February.
A plurality of participants were from the continent of Europe (40 percent), followed by Oceania (27 percent), and North America (25 percent). Three percent of participants were from South America and Asia, while less than 1 percent were from Africa. Ages ranged anywhere from 1 to more than 90 years old, with most participants being middle-aged.
Motive for Refusal
Individuals participating in the study declined COVID-19 vaccination for various reasons. These included past vaccine injuries, preference for more natural remedies, lack of trust in pharmaceutical companies and government entities, and concerns about the validity of vaccine study results.
One-third of the individuals in the study self-reported that they received vaccinations as children. That figure may be low, as others may not have reported—or even remembered—their previous vaccinations.
While some had never been vaccinated, the cohort was mainly concerned about the safety, efficacy, and necessity of the COVID-19 vaccines, not all vaccines in general.
Discrimination Based on Vaccination
Between 20 and 50 percent of respondents, depending on where they lived, reported being personal targets of hate and discrimination. Many felt victimized for their vaccination status, especially those living in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and South America.
They reported that they faced discrimination in the workplace, from friends or family members, and from their respective state authorities, because of their “unvaccinated” status.
The prejudice experienced within the workplace by respondents resulted in heavy economic burdens for many. For example, 29 percent of respondents from Australia and New Zealand reported losing their jobs during the five months that the survey was administered.
These survey results dovetail with what unvaccinated individuals have been facing globally. Those who don’t succumb to peer pressure, advertising, or incentivizing are then threatened with an ultimatum: Get the vaccine or get fired.
That’s what happened to Destiny Carpenter, a former nurse at Colorado Canyons Hospital. Carpenter is among one of the hundreds of U.S. nurses who have been fired for refusing to get the vaccine, as Fox News reported in September 2021.
Carpenter was nominated for the Daisy Award for extraordinary nursing three times during her tenure at the hospital. This award is granted to the most deserving nurse for exuding compassionate care to their patients.
In February, FiercePharma reported that more than 15,500 health care workers in the United States had been fired or suspended or had chosen to resign from their hospital jobs over their decision to remain unvaccinated.
About 40 percent of respondents, regardless of age, reported that they experienced mild or moderate mental health issues during the duration of the survey, while approximately 20 percent reported experiencing severe mental health issues.
In an analysis of the mental health issues experienced by the cohort, the scientists noted that the mental health burden “may be associated more to the human response to the pandemic, rather than psychological, fear-based reactions to any threat posed by the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself.”
In other words, the respondents’ mental health problems appeared to mainly be a result of being stigmatized and marginalized from society.
A Pandemic of the Unvaccinated?
While the study gives insight into the experience of the unvaccinated, it always raises questions about assertions that this group is an undue burden on the health care system.
“Only 74 respondents out of the 5,196 (1.4 percent) who reported suspected or known SARS-CoV-2 infection also reported that they were hospitalized following infection. Therefore, outpatient or inpatient hospitalization was reported in just 0.4 percent of the full survey cohort. Of these, 15 were outpatient only, another 15 were hospitalized for less than 3 days, 26 were hospitalized between 3 and 7 days, 11 for between 7 and 14 days and only 10 for more than 14 days,” the study reads.
While the study is potentially prone to bias because of the selection pool for the survey, an infection-hospitalization ratio of 0.4 percent would certainly challenge many assertions about the burden of the unvaccinated.
“Infection-hospitalization ratio estimates ranged from 0.4 percent for those younger than 40 years to 9.2 percent for those older than 60 years.”
The study also found that hospitalization rates based on case counts overestimated the IHR by a factor of 10, “but this overestimation differed by demographic groups, especially age.”
Most of the CGC respondents who reported that they had caught COVID-19 had only mild symptoms and were sick for less than a week. Fatigue and coughing were the most common symptoms recorded.
Beyond the fact that they were unvaccinated, another unique trait of the CGC cohort may also be their propensity to try various therapeutics to treat their COVID-19 infections.
Against the Grain
Participants reported that they didn’t need a vaccine to lessen their symptoms: Most infections were mild to begin with, and many respondents said they turned to natural remedies when they did get sick.
A study published in June 2021 in the journal Inflammopharmacology by an international team of researchers from India, Italy, and the United States, shows that using natural remedies is a scientifically sound choice.
This study explored the immune-boosting properties of vitamins and minerals in combating COVID-19 infections. The scientists found that if administered at higher-than-recommended daily doses, many vitamins had the potential to reduce viral load and risk of hospitalization from COVID-19.
The decision to combat COVID-19 with non-pharmacological immune-enhancing interventions may also help explain why the hospitalization rates of the unvaccinated in the study were so low.
What About Ivermectin?
A portion of the participants reported that they also took ivermectin, an anti-parasitical that has been both promoted and hotly criticized as a treatment for COVID-19, as The Epoch Times has reported.
While ivermectin remains controversial, a meta-analysis published in June 2021 in the American Journal of Therapeutics states: “Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.”
The announcement has raised concerns that side effects from the vaccine aren’t being weighed against potential benefits.
As of June 12, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) indicated that there have been 1,301,354 adverse events and 28,859 deaths from COVID-19 vaccines. A recent analysis of VAERS reports done by two journalists in Israel revealed that there were 58 serious adverse effects in babies prior to the rollout of the vaccine authorization for those aged 6 months and older. The reports failed to indicate if these infants and toddlers were involved in the Pfizer clinical trial or why they received vaccination.
Verkerk is deeply concerned about the CDC vaccine authorization for children younger than 5. He holds master’s and doctorate degrees from Imperial College London and is co-author of more than 60 peer-reviewed journal articles in the areas of health, agriculture, and environment. He’s also the co-chair of the World Council of Health’s Health & Humanity Committee. He told The Epoch Times via email that many parents want this vaccine for their children because, like every parent, they want what’s best for their child.
“However, they’ve been misled as to the known science on both the benefits and the risks,” he wrote. “There could be disastrous long-term consequences for some children if they are exposed to the spike protein via the vaccine before they are exposed to circulating coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, which would otherwise result in broader-based, more robust, naturally-acquired immunity.”
For Verkerk, it’s about choice. We shouldn’t vilify those who rely on natural immunity or refuse the vaccines for religious, medical, or ethical reasons, he said.
“We have seen a dramatic erosion of the principles of medical ethics,” he wrote.
We need to respect autonomy (the right of competent adults to make individualized and informed decisions about their own medical care) and adhere to the principle of first doing no harm, as well as to the principles of beneficence and justice, according to Verkerk.
We spend a good deal of time on this Substack articulating the vast array of negative consequences of lockdowns on society. As I note in my upcoming book:
Many of those who joined Rational Ground and what we came to call Team Reality had similar experiences. Life isn’t always fair, and we adults are willing to bear with the challenges foisted on us, but when the government’s insane rules harm our children, watch out.
Below are links to some of the more prominent impacts we’ve cataloged against children from the egregious policies foisted on families during the pandemic. We’ll be discussing these and other items today at noon on our Rational Ground podcast.
This week a new study scanned the literature to determine what countries across the world are experiencing because of the pandemic and stringency measures. Here’s a thread on that:
Meta-study: “… anxiety, depression, [PTSD], and sleep disorders.” “… measures such as quarantine and isolation for infection prevention may have immediate and prolonged mental health impacts.”
Our illustrious overlords of health determined it was better for kids that they be banished from school and locked indoors eating takeout. The result? BMI rate of change for 2 to 19 year olds DOUBLED! COVID didn’t do this. OUR POLICIES DID.
A group of parents in Gainesville, FL, sent 6 face masks to a lab at the University of Florida, requesting an analysis of contaminants found on the masks after they had been worn. The resulting report found that five masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.
Our friends at the Brownstone Institute have compiled a tremendous list of resources, analysis and commentary on this subject:
This article originally appeared in Rational Ground. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News. Republished with permission.
The protection against severe illness from so-called natural immunity remains superior to the protection bestowed by COVID-19vaccines, according to a new study.
People who survived COVID-19 infection and were not vaccinated had sky-high protection against severe or fatal COVID-19, researchers in Qatar found.
“Effectiveness of primary infection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 reinfection was 97.3 percent … irrespective of the variant of primary infection or reinfection, and with no evidence for waning. Similar results were found in sub-group analyses for those ≥50 years of age,” Dr. Laith Abu-Raddad, with Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, and colleagues said after studying long-term natural immunity in unvaccinated people.
That percentage is higher than the protection from COVID-19 vaccines, according to other studies and real-world data.
Swedish researchers, for instance, found in May that two doses of a vaccine were just 54 percent effective against the Omicron variant of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19.
South African scientists, meanwhile, found the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines peaked at 88 percent, and quickly dropped to 70 percent or lower.
The Qatar group found natural immunity for over 14 months after a person’s first infection “remains very strong, with no evidence for waning, irrespective of variant.”
Few researchers have studied natural immunity long-term among unvaccinated persons, in part because many of the people have eventually received a COVID-19 vaccine.
The vaccines, meanwhile, have waned against both infection and severe illness over time, triggering recommendations for booster doses, with some Americans even getting five doses within 10 months.
Natural Immunity Performs Poorly Against Reinfection
The vaccines were once said to provide close to 100 percent protection against symptomatic infection. They now provide under 50 percent protection against infection after a short period of time, even after booster doses, following the emergence of Omicron.
That strain and its subvariants are dominant in countries around the world, including the United States and Qatar.
Natural immunity was thought to providestrong protection against reinfection. But the Qatari researchers found it also provides poor protection against reinfection from Omicron.
Pre-Omicron infection against pre-Omicron reinfection was as high as 90.5 percent, and remained around 70 percent by the 16th month, according to the study. But pre-Omicron infection against Omicron reinfection was just 38 percent effective, although it was higher among people infected with the original Wuhan strain or with the Delta variant, and lower among those who got sick from the Alpha or Beta strains.
Modeling signaled a drop to zero percent protection by 18 months, but the shielding still appears to last longer than that of vaccines, researchers said.
“Vaccine immunity against Omicron subvariants lasts for <6 months but pre-Omicron natural immunity, assuming Gompertz decay, may last for just over a year,” they wrote.
Limitations of the study included differences in testing frequency among the cohorts studied, and depletion of groups who had a COVID-19 infection due to deaths.
Jim Smith – whose concurrent roles as a Pfizer board member and Reuters CEO appear to pose a conflict of interest – serves as a board member of the World Economic Forum’s anti-corruption initiative.
Smith’s leading role with the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Partnering Against Corruption Initiative follows controversy over his position at the pharmaceutical giant and mainstream media outlet, which frequently reports on Pfizer. Reuters has published tens of thousands of articles covering or mentioning Pfizer, though the articles never disclose Smith’s affiliation with either entity.
Smith serves on the board of the WEF’s Partnering Against Corruption Initiative, dubbed the “leading business voice on anti-corruption and transparency.”
“It is one of the Forum’s strongest cross-industry collaborative efforts and is creating a highly visible, agenda-setting platform by working with business leaders, international organizations and governments to address corruption, transparency and emerging-market risks,” explains a WEF synopsis.
“Today’s common struggle against corruption goes far beyond compliance. More problematic is the profound and worsening trust deficit that exists between institutions and individuals,” Smith begins before lamenting the public’s loss of trust in mainstream media outlets:
“The widespread perception that institutions—both public and private—are not acting in the interests of the people they serve pervades the thinking of communities across the globe. News organizations, which have historically served as the watchdog for governments and business leaders, are less trusted by the public than ever before.”
“Public confidence has been corroded by a concentration on near-term priorities and payoffs, propelled by election-cycle politics or quarterly results targets that too often leave children worse off than their parents,” laments Smith.
The article, however, comes amidst the Federal Drug Administration and Pfizer attempting to delay the release of documents related to the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine.
The WEF has been accused of exploiting COVID-19 to advance its “Great Reset” agenda to advance its radical agenda of abolishing private property ownership.
A second professor from Laval University in Quebec City has been suspended for questioning the need to vaccinate children against COVID-19.
Nicolas Derome, a professor of molecular biology, was suspended for the same reason and under similar circumstances as his colleague Patrick Provost, a professor of microbiology, infectious diseases, and immunology.
Derome and Provost both participated in activities organized by Réinfo COVID, which describes itself as a collective of nurses, physicians, scientists, and citizens seeking to generate debate about how the pandemic has been handled by the government.
Derome gave an online presentation organized by the collective in late November 2021, in which he said children were not at high risk for complications from COVID-19.
He said there had been “zero” serious cases among the 0 to 17 age bracket, with or without comorbidity, with his presentation slide indicating the data came from Quebec’s public health institute (INSPQ) and expert assessments.
A review of the INSPQ data for the first four waves, covering Feb. 23, 2020, to Dec. 4, 2021, reveals there were 73 ICU admissions for individuals between age 0 and 19. The data does not indicate if the admissions were “because of COVID” or “with COVID.”
These 73 ICU admissions represent an average of 1.6 percent of total ICU admissions across age groups during the four waves covered.
Derome also said children between 1 and 14 years old were 15 times more likely to die from a road accident than from COVID, and noted there had been no deaths for the 5 to 19 years olds.
“This information is very important to have in order to make a free and informed choice regarding this vaccination campaign for kids 5 to 11,” he said at the start of his presentation.
A current review of data for the first four waves shows one death occurred for the 10–19 age group during the third wave. A separate INSPQ chart reviewed on deaths and presence of comorbidities shows no deaths reported for the 19 and under category with the mention that percentages are not reported when the total number is less than 5.
Derome said, quoting published literature, that children have a better innate response to defend against COVID, which explains why they suffer less serious outcomes.
The professor also quoted from the U.N. children agency UNICEF, which said at the time that the World Health Organization (WHO) did not recommend COVID vaccines for children, due to lack of trials and little to no safety data for that age group.
Since then, the WHO has said that the Pfizer vaccine can be safely administered to children from 5 years of age and that both Pfizer and Moderna are licensed for use in children above 12.
The professor also raised the issue of the waning efficacy of vaccines—not only against infection, but hospitalizations—by quoting White House COVID adviser Anthony Fauci.
Derome gave his presentation when Quebec had just started its vaccination campaign for 5- to 11-year-olds.
Derome was contacted by The Epoch Times but was not available to comment.
Laval University said when contacted that it would not comment on the “personal situation of its employees.”
At the time Derome’s video was published, Laval spokesperson Andrée-Anne Stewart told Radio-Canada that his remarks “in no way reflect the stance of Laval University and its faculty of science and engineering regarding the health crisis.”
“Like all members of the teaching staff, professor Derome is held to all the rigour and scientific integrity required by this function,” Stewart said.
‘Sliding Into Dictatorship’
On Dec. 7, 2021, Derome’s colleague, Patrick Provost, said in a scientific panel organized by Réinfo COVID that, based on provincial data, there is more risk of hospitalization for children from the vaccines than from COVID-19 itself, in addition to not having a portrait of mid- to long-term side effects.
Provost was suspended for eight weeks without pay in mid-June for his comments. It’s likely that Derome received a similar penalty.
Réinfo COVID posted a letter on its website presumably from Provost asking, on behalf of Laval University, that the video of the panel he participated in be taken down, or else he could face further sanctions, including being fired.
The collective refused, citing the need for the public to be aware of the “utility, efficacy, risks, and ethics of vaccinating children.”
Réinfo said it would try to help the professors, noting: “If universities gag their professors, as do different professional orders, we’re sliding into dictatorship.”
The suspensions of Derome and Provost have added fuel to the debate about academic freedom in Quebec, which just last month adopted a law to protect it.
“Those situations at Laval University confirm that it was necessary to legislate on this issue and the law stipulates that every university must, within a year, write a policy and put in place a committee to monitor the implementation of the policy and review the complaints related to academic freedom in universities,” Higher Education Minister Danielle McCann said in a statement to The Epoch Times.
“The law also emphasizes that academic freedom must be practiced in conformity with norms of scientific rigour.”
The professors have the support of their union, which has filed a grievance, and of the larger union federation it’s affiliated to.
“Independently of what we can think of comments or statements made by a colleague, heads of the university have no legitimacy to intervene in the content of comments made by those colleagues,” says an email sent by the Laval teacher’s union (SPUL) to its members.
“The leadership of Laval University made a wrong call and hurts the principles guaranteeing the functioning of the University and academic freedom,” SPUL president Louis-Philippe Lampron said in a tweet.
The Epoch Times reached out to SPUL but didn’t hear back by publication time.
A provincial university professor’s labour union federation to which the SPUL is attached, the FQPPU, said the suspension of the two professors was even more “serious and surprising” since it occurred after the province passed the law on academic freedom.
“The conformity to the consensus of a scientific community is in itself not a sufficiently precise norm to justify a disciplinary sanction against a professor who exercises his academic freedom,” the FQPPU said in a statement.
It said it’s the duty of colleagues and other academics to refute or point out weaknesses in remarks or works presented.
“In an institution that respects academic freedom, it’s by refutation that professors and others participating in teaching and research must push back against comments which drift away from the knowledge validated by proven methods.”
Sixty-two thousand Army National Guard and Reserve soldiers are being deprived of pay and benefits, due to noncompliance with the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate.
The military service members who are not vaccinated, or do not have a pending or approved exemption, will no longer be allowed to drill or train, Army officials said last week. If noncompliance continues, officials say they will discharge them. The move to bar soldiers from service, pay, and benefits comes as the armed forces have struggled with recruitment. The Army cited “maintaining readiness” as the branch’s rationale for enforcing the vaccine mandate, according to a statement.
Army officials point out their “policy affords every Soldier the opportunity to request an exemption, such as for medical or religious concerns.” Previous reporting by the Washington Free Beacon, however, found that military leadership has granted few. In the Marine Corps, just three service members were granted religious exemptions. Congressional Republicans have pressured the Pentagon for more information about the armed forces vaccine mandate, but their calls have gone unanswered.
Republican leaders have attempted to ban the use of taxpayer funds to implement the Department of Defense’s vaccine mandate. “Hundreds of service members and their families have reached out to our offices about the direct impact of this mandate, their careers of service, and toll on their families,” a coalition of Republican House lawmakers led by Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.) wrote in February.
Republican governors have pledged not to discharge guardsmen who refuse to get vaccinated. Options available to governors to maintain soldiers’ pay and benefits, however, appear limited. Governors can deploy soldiers on state active-duty orders, which would entitle them to pay, but not federal benefits. It is also unclear how conflicting orders from state and federal authorities would be handled in the National Guard’s chain of command.
A national legal rights organization has filed the first of what it says will be dozens of lawsuits against U.S. health care facilities that are denying patients organ transplants for not being vaccinated against COVID-19.
In the first complaint—which was filed against the University of Michigan’s transplant center—the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) argues the hospitals are carrying out illegal and unconstitutional policies by requiring medical treatment against the will of a patient.
“Individuals in the United States have the inherent and fundamental Constitutional Right given by God, not any government board, to seek or to refuse medical treatment or any part of a course of medical treatment,” PJI states in its lawsuit it served on July 5 to the board of regents that oversees the University of Michigan.
According to Dave Peters, senior counsel for PJI, the California organisation will be filing a second lawsuit sometime this week against the Lehigh Valley Clinic in Pennsylvania.
Neither the University of Michigan nor Lehigh Valley Clinic responded to inquiries by The Epoch Times about the litigations.
In a written response to PJI’s notice of intent to sue the hospital dated May 26, the general counsel for the university Thomas Kent stated that “the complaint fails to allege the violation of any clearly established constitutional right.”
In addition to alleged constitutional violations, the lawsuits allege that the hospitals are also violating informed consent laws and the Hippocratic oath of doctors to do no harm to patients.
“They are electing to let patients die by refusing to provide them with life-saving medical care by forcing a medical care that has no established benefits,” said Peters, “if that’s not morally, ethically, and legally outrageous then I don’t know what is.”
Ross Barranco, one of the patients represented in the Michigan lawsuit, told The Epoch Times that he is opposed to the vaccine for reasons that include the fact he does not believe it safe.
Barranco, who needs a kidney transplant, said the government or hospitals have yet to produce any studies that show otherwise.
“They get compensation for giving you the shots and if you have any damages from the shot they get money for treating you for that—”It’s a win-win situation for the medical industry,” said Barranco.
In spite of his compromised health, Barranco is running for Oakland County Commissioner in Michigan’s 15th District to help he says, “restore people’s right to sovereignty in America.”
Other patients represented in the PJI lawsuits include 35-year-old Katie Shier who is in dire need of a heart transplant.
Shier has just seven percent of heart function remaining and is being kept alive by an implanted Ventricular Assist service.
She was placed on the candidate list for a heart transplant last June, but like Barranco and others—was removed in December after the University of Michigan adopted a policy that all transplant candidates must be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Vaccine or no transplant policies are not just restricted to the COVID jab.
Recently, as reported in an exclusive story by The Epoch Times, Vanderbilt’s Children Hospital denied performing a life-saving heart transplant on 6-month-old August Stoll because he was not up to date on the state’s recommended schedule of vaccines for children under the age of 12.
Deborah Catalano, senior litigation coordinator for Liberty Counsel, which has represented several veterans denied organ transplants for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine, told The Epoch Times that she now has an unvaccinated client who is being denied post-op care for a kidney transplant she had before the vaccine existed.
Hospitals have said they are following recommendations set by national transplant organizations, some of which have strong financial ties to makers of vaccines including the COVID-19 vaccine.
The American Society of Transplantation (AST) and United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS), for example, list vaccine manufacturing giant Sanofi—which partnered with both Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson to produce the COVID-19 vaccine—among their corporate sponsors.
AST’s corporate sponsors also include vaccine giant Merck, CSL Behring, which partnered AstraZeneca to produce its COVID-19 vaccine; and Novartis, which like Sanofi, partnered with Pfizer to produce its COVID-19 vaccine.
UNOS receives 10 percent of its funding from the federal government, which heavily promotes the COVID-19 vaccine.
Peters told The Epoch Times that his organization is prepared to take the hospitals denying life-saving transplants over a patient’s vaccine status all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if need be.
Legislative efforts are also underway in several states to ban the practice of hospitals refusing to perform organ transplants on patients that are not vaccinated.
In May, a mother filed a federal lawsuit against the DeVos Children’s Hospital in Grand Rapids, Michigan, for requiring her 17-year-old daughter, who has stage three renal failure, to have the COVID-19 vaccine before performing a kidney transplant.
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, a Nobel prize-nominated physician who famously discovered and distributed an early treatment protocol for COVID, dubbed the “Zelenko Protocol,” passed away from cancer on June 30, 2022.
The next day, some Twitter users started taking note of the suspension of the account of the Zelenko Freedom Foundation, a group dedicated “to provide funding to social entities and social activities surrounding education, leadership development, health literacy, advocacy, public policy, social, health and community development,” according to their website.
“It is no secret that big tech abhors free speech and instead worships at the altar of Marxist collectivism and group-think. The Silicon Valley speech cartel has sunk to new lows when twitter suspended the Zelenko Freedom Foundation account less than 24 hours after the passing of Dr. Vladimir Zelenko,” co-chair of the Zelenko Freedom Foundation, Ann Vandersteel, told The Epoch Times.
She maintains that no one from Twitter reached out to verify who was managing the account.
“If they had bothered to do even the most basic of inquiries they would have learned that the account was run by the foundation, not by Dr. Zelenko. The account wasn’t established for some end around their ridiculous ban of Dr. Zelekno, the account was established to represent the interests of the Foundation, which is committed to investing in individuals and technologies that will save and extend the lives of people all across the globe,” she said.
Vandersteel thinks that the suspension of the foundation’s account was done for “no reason other than petty vindictiveness.”
“The question is, what does Elon Musk think? Does he believe in saving lives or does he want those lifesaving technologies silenced?”
Zelenko had been practicing in Monroe, New York, in 2020 during the outbreak of COVID-19, and is credited with having treated about 7,500 patients with his method.
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko. (Courtesy of the Zelenko Freedom Foundation)
Zelenko could not sit back and wait for politicians and health officials to agree on prescribed treatments, so he came up with the “Zelenko Protocol”—a combination of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), zinc, azithromycin, and other drugs, including steroids, and later informed then-President Donald Trump about it via a letter.
The other co-chair of the foundation, Kevin Jenkins, told The Epoch Times that the suspension reminded him of a Martin Luther King quote:
“All we say to America is ‘be true to what’s on paper.’ If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privilege, because they haven’t committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of the press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. And so, just as I say, we aren’t going to let dogs or water hoses turn us around; we aren’t going to let any injunction turn us around.”
“When Ann and I spoke with Dr. Zelenko, regarding the mission of this Foundation he said, ‘I want the truth to spread like a mantra!’” Jenkins said.
“Our team at the Zelenko Freedom Foundation will stay true to Dr. Zelenko and Dr. King! We will fight to the end to save humanity! Come join us Zfreedomfoundation.com. Dr. Zelenko’s dream will not be deferred!” he added.
A plan to mandate COVID-19 vaccine shots for hundreds of thousands of students in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) will remain on pause after a Los Angeles County judge ruled on July 5 that the district lacks the authority to do so.
In his ruling, Judge Mitchell Beckloff of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County sided with a parent, whose 12-year-old son attends a public magnet school in North Hollywood. The parent filed the complaint in October 2021, about a month after the LAUSD announced its vaccination mandate.
Under the district’s mandate, all eligible students aged 12 and above must show proof of COVID-19 vaccination, or get approved for exemptions by Jan. 10 in order to attend school in person. Those who don’t comply would be transferred into the district’s remote learning program, City of Angels, which offers a mixture of live instruction and self-study.
The suing parent, identified as G.F., argued that it is unfair and unlawful for the child, identified as D.F., to have to lose his hard-earned place at a competitive school just because he and his parent have chosen to not get vaccinated on the basis of personal beliefs.
According to G.F., his son had acquired natural immunity after recovering from COVID-19. He also said he worried that vaccinating the child would put the child’s health in jeopardy.
“Either I get him a vaccine that I fear could harm him, or I send him to a virtual school that I know from experience and LAUSD’s own data would prove academically vastly inferior,” the father said earlier this year in a sworn declaration, reported City News Service. “The idea of dumping him into an online school, free of a rigorous academic program and torn away from his like-minded classmates, breaks my heart.”
Beckloff, who wrote in March in a tentative opinion that he might dismiss the case, agreed with the father in his final ruling, acknowledging that if D.F. refuses to comply with the mandate, he will be forced to accept a very different education.
“The [mandate] is not merely about how education is delivered or who may be physically present on campus as the court previously viewed it. Instead, the [mandate] dictates which school the student may attend, and the curriculum he may continue to receive,” the judge wrote, reported the Los Angeles Times.
The judge also noted that the LAUSD mandate is in conflict with California’s public health law, which allows personal beliefs-based vaccination exemptions.
“Judge Beckloff’s ruling confirms that individual school districts do not have the authority to impose local vaccination requirements in excess of statewide requirements,” Arie Spangler, an attorney for G.F., said in a statement. “We are very pleased with the ruling, as it ensures that no child will be forced out of the classroom due to their COVID-19 vaccination status.”
The decision doesn’t have an immediate impact on LAUSD, since the mandate has already been placed on hold after California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced in April that the state would wait for the federal government to give full approval to the COVID-19 vaccine for young children. The Newsom administration and school district have both said they won’t pursue the pediatric vaccine mandate until at least the summer of 2023.
The Labor Department (DOL) “published an improper payment rate of 18.71 percent for the UI program, which resulted in an estimated $77.2 billion in reported gross improper payments,” the IG reported. The improper payment rate for the previous year was 9.17 percent, equal to about $37.8 billion.
“Additionally, DOL published an unknown payment rate of 0.21 percent, which resulted in estimated unknown payments of $865 million. These estimates were based on a statistical estimation approach that met a 95 percent confidence level, plus or minus 3 percent,” the report said.
The IG report was prompted by requirements of the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, which requires federal departments and agencies to establish and report to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) improper payment rates in government benefit programs, as well as annual targets for reducing those rates.
The 18.71 percent rate of improper UI payments in 2021 represents a significant increase for the program, which saw a steadily improving trend during the previous four years of President Donald Trump’s administration.
The rate at the end of the first year of Trump’s tenure was 12.11 percent. The rate increased to 12.63 percent the following year, but then plunged to 10.21 percent in 2019, and to 2020’s 9.17 percent, according to data provided by paymentaccuracy.gov.
Rep. Rick Allen (R-Ga.), a member of the House Education and Labor Committee, told The Epoch Times on July 6 that he’s co-sponsoring legislation to address examples of wasteful federal spending like that highlighted by the IG report.
“It’s unacceptable that criminals utilized a global health crisis to defraud the United States government’s unemployment programs. Even worse, the misguided Biden administration policies, which discouraged people from going back to work, incentivized scammers to steal more money from the American taxpayer,” he said.
“Congress must now fulfill its oversight duties and help hold these criminals accountable. I am a proud co-sponsor of [Texas Republican] Rep. Kevin Brady’s Chase COVID Unemployment Fraud Act, which would empower the states to recover the money lost to fraud.”
Brady is the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee that oversees unemployment insurance.
Other Republicans on the Ways and Means panel also blasted the improper payments and lauded the measure originally introduced by Brady.
Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-Ind.) told The Epoch Times that “it is painfully obvious that brazen criminals capitalized on pandemic relief programs and stole billions from hardworking American taxpayers,” and she urged Biden and congressional Democrats “to work with us to take this crisis seriously, expose fraud, and hold criminals accountable. We must send a clear signal that fraud will not be tolerated.”
Similarly, Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.) said, “House Democrats refused to hold a single Ways and Means oversight hearing to address the growing problem of unchecked improper payments,” adding that “it shouldn’t surprise folks that a new, big-government program that incentivizes folks to not return to work—and had zero oversight—is ripe for fraud.”
And Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) told The Epoch Times that “the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress have shown no interest in holding these fraudulent actors accountable. That is why I am an original co-sponsor of the Chase COVID Unemployment Fraud Act, a bill to protect taxpayers by clawing back funds and recovering these improper payments. This is a priority for me now, and it will certainly remain a priority when Republicans control the House.”
On the other side of Capitol Hill, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), the Senate’s most visible foe of waste, fraud, and abuse in the government, told The Epoch Times, “It’s no surprise that we are seeing a record level of fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars being reported in the wake of wasteful and unsupervised government spending under the guise of COVID,” said Ernst. “The federal government needs to take every step possible to recover fraudulent payment and put safeguards in place to stop future abuses like this from happening again.”
The IG didn’t offer an analysis to account for the doubling of the improper payment rate in only the first year of resident Joe Biden’s administration, except to note that DOL included within the UI program expenditures made under the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) program and the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) program.
Both the FPUC and PEUC programs were included in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act of 2020, the $2.2 trillion emergency legislation approved by Congress and signed into law by Trump in March 2020.
The purpose of the CARES legislation was to provide a massive economic stimulus to offset the slowdown in the national economy that resulted from the emergency measures enacted by the government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic that has to date killed more than 1 million Americans.
Under the CARES Act, the FPUC and PEUC provided $600 per week in additional federally funded unemployment benefits through July 2020. The program was extended but with a reduced weekly benefit of $300, which expired on Sept. 6, 2021.
The IG report was prepared by KMPG LLP, under contract to the government.
In response to the report, DOL acknowledged that the inclusion of the CARES Act programs makes it difficult to measure improper payments. The department insisted that the figures it provided to OMB were accurate as presented, but could include an overestimate of the improper payments under the regular unemployment insurance program.
The department said it will revise its calculations in preparation for the next assessment and pledged to “take the IG’s concern, which we share, in this [revised] methodology to ensure transparent, accurate and cost-effective reporting of this expired program.”
Former New York Times journalist Alex Berenson has been allowed to return to Twitter, which banned him in 2021 for allegedly spreading COVID-19 misinformation.
Berenson and Twitter released similar statements on July 6.
“The parties have come to a mutually acceptable resolution. I have been reinstated. Twitter has acknowledged that my tweets should have not led to my suspension at that time,” Berenson said in a blog post on July 6, which he linked to in his first post on the platform since he was permanently suspended,” Berenson said in a blog post.
“The parties have come to a mutually acceptable resolution. Twitter has reinstated Mr. Berenson’s account. Upon further review, Twitter acknowledges Mr. Berenson’s Tweets should not have led to his account’s suspension at that time,” a Twitter spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email.
Vaccines
Minutes after Berenson posted for the first time following his reinstatement, he re-posted the words that triggered the ban.
“It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it—at best—as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS. And we want to mandate it? Insanity,” he wrote.
Berenson was referring to the COVID-19 vaccines, which have proven increasingly unable to prevent infection from the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. Also known as the SARS-CoV-2, the virus causes COVID-19.
Though the vaccines have been authorized and approved for prevention of the virus, they’re actually recommended primarily for helping prevent severe disease among those who contract the illness.
Twitter had initially claimed that Berenson’s post was “misleading,” even though the company acknowledged that “studies indicate a reduction in vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron variant” of the virus.
Studies show that the Moderna, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson shots—the only three available in the United States—provide little protection against Omicron, and that the protection quickly wanes.
Some studies indicate that the vaccinated are more likely to contract the virus after certain periods of time elapse following vaccination.
U.S. health authorities still recommend vaccination for virtually all Americans.
Lawsuit
Berenson sued Twitter after being banned, claiming the company breached its contract with him as a user.
A federal judge tossed all of the claims except for the breach of contract one. Berenson and Twitter recently announced they’d agreed on a settlement in principle.
The details of the settlement have not yet been entered into the court docket, with the parties saying they’re still negotiating.
According to court filings, Berenson was told by a senior Twitter executive that posts that sparked controversy would not lead to him being banned from the platform. But Twitter began taking action against him after Dr. Anthony Fauci, a top adviser to resident Joe Biden, said some of Berenson’s remarks were “horrifying,” first locking him out of his account and eventually enacting the ban.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup, a Clinton appointee, said in a recent ruling that Berenson “plausibly avers that Twitter’s conduct here modified its contract with plaintiff and then breached that contract by failing to abide by its own five-strike policy and its specific commitments set forth through its vice president.”
The lawyer representing whistleblower Brook Jackson said Pfizer is arguing the court should dismiss Jackson’s lawsuit alleging fraud in Pfizer’s COVID-19 clinical trials because the U.S. government knew about the wrongdoings but continued to do business with the vaccine maker.
A lawsuit filed by whistleblower Brook Jackson alleging Pfizer and two of its contractors manipulated data and committed other acts of fraud during Pfizer’s COVID-19 clinical trials is paused following a motion by the defendants to dismiss the case.
In an interview with The Defender, Jackson’s lawyer said Pfizer argued the lawsuit, which was filed under the False Claims Act, should be dismissed because the U.S. government knew of the wrongdoings in the clinical trials but continued to do business with the vaccine maker.
Under the False Claims Act, whistleblowers can be rewarded for confidentially disclosing fraud that results in a financial loss to the federal government.
However, a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded the scope of a legal principle known as “materiality” resulted in a series of federal court decisions in which fraud cases brought under the False Claims Act were dismissed.
As interpreted by the Supreme Court, if the government continued paying a contractor despite the contractor’s fraudulent activity, the fraud was not considered “material” to the contract.
Pfizer is a federal contractor because it signed multiple contracts with the U.S. government to provide COVID-19 vaccines and Paxlovid, a pill used to treat the virus.
“Pfizer claims they can get away with fraud as long as the government would write them a check despite knowing about the fraud,” attorney Robert Barnes said.
The other two defendants in the case are Ventavia Research Group, which conducted vaccine trials on behalf of Pfizer, and ICON PLC, also a Pfizer contractor.
In an attempt to strengthen the False Claims Act’s anti-retaliation provisions and install new safeguards against industry-level blacklisting of whistleblowers seeking employment, Congress in July 2021 introduced the False Claims Amendments Act of 2021.
In December 2021, Pfizer hired a well-connected lobbyist, Hazen Marshall, and the law firm Williams & Jensen to lobby against the bill.
Pfizer previously was heavily fined in connection with the False Claims Act. As part of a 2009 settlement, the company paid $2.3 billion in fines — the largest healthcare fraud settlement in the history of the U.S. Department of Justice — stemming from allegations of illegal marketing of off-label products not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
“Pfizer, one of the most criminally fined drug companies in the world, wants to weaken the laws that hold them accountable,” Barnes told The Defender.
Congress has taken no action on the False Claims Amendments Act since November 2021, when the bill was added to the Senate’s legislative calendar.
Barnes said the outcome of Jackson’s case against Pfizer is significant not just for his client, but also for the American public.
“This case will determine if Big Pharma can rip off the American people using a dangerous drug that harms millions without any legal remedy because they claim the government was in on the scam.”
Jackson was a regional director for Ventavia for a brief period in 2020 but was fired after she notified the FDA about issues with Pfizer’s vaccine trials.
After she was fired, she gave The BMJ a cache of internal company documents, photos and recordings highlighting the alleged wrongdoing by Ventavia.
The documents she provided contained evidence of falsified data, blind trial failures and awareness on the part of at least one Ventavia executive that members of the company’s staff were “falsifying data.”
Jackson’s documents also provided evidence of administrators who had “no training” or medical certifications, or who provided “very little oversight” during the trials.
Jackson filed her complaint in August 2021, in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division, alleging Pfizer, Ventavia and ICON “deliberately withheld crucial information from the United States that calls the safety and efficacy of their vaccine into question.”
According to the complaint, Jackson, who had more than 15 years of experience working with clinical trials, “repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues” during the approximately two weeks she was employed by Ventavia.
“Brook [Jackson] brought a Qui Tam action and a retaliatory discharge case against Pfizer and others for fraud on the people concerning Pfizer’s false certifications to the U.S. Department of Defense about the safety and efficacy of their COVID-19 vaccine,” Barnes said.
A Qui Tam case refers to a provision under the False Claims Act that allows individuals and entities with evidence of fraud against federal programs or contracts to sue the wrongdoer on behalf of the U.S. government
“She was part of the clinical trials, witnessed extraordinary malfeasance, blew the whistle, and was quickly fired after she blew the whistle.”
Barnes said his legal team will in August file its opposition brief to Pfizer’s motion to dismiss, and the judge may rule on the motion to dismiss by fall 2022.
The National Institutes of Health canceled a nearly $2 million taxpayer-funded trial that would have force-fed puppies experimental drugs, after a Washington Free Beacon report.
NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is helmed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, was slated to spend $1,836,453 in taxpayer dollars to test an experimental hay fever drug on mice, rats, and dogs, including puppies, according to funding documents obtained by the White Coat Waste Project, a government watchdog group, and provided to the Free Beacon in May. The most severe symptoms of hay fever, also known as seasonal allergies, are a runny nose and sneezing.
Following the Free Beacon report, Sen. Joni Ernst (R., Iowa) launched an investigation into NIAID’s project, describing the puppy tests as “invasive, painful, and potentially deadly procedures.” Fauci informed Ernst late last month that the puppy trials are now canceled, according to a copy of the June 22 letter sent to Ernst and obtained exclusively by the Free Beacon.
Ernst said the cancellation is a win for the taxpayers and should serve as a wake-up call to the NIH that Congress will not sit by while it abuses animals in the name of science. NIH’s animal tests have stoked anger from lawmakers and put the U.S. health agency under a microscope, particularly as questions linger about Fauci and the NIH’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. NIH’s funding for labs in Russia and China also have generated concerns about the agency’s priorities and led Congress to ban the practice last week.
A company called the Inimmune Corporation was tapped by NIAID to perform at least five separate experiments on dogs that were to include force-feeding them experimental drugs for several months. This included a proposal to purchase “six-month old puppies” to be used in the tests.
“Although the contract to Inimmune Corporation proposed the use of murine and canine preclinical animal models, after consultation with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the company elected to proceed using two rodent models only,” Fauci wrote to Ernst. “No experiments utilizing the canine model are being conducted under this contract.”
Fauci attempted to justify the trials, saying that 60 million people in the United States have seasonal allergies “and many patients do not achieve adequate relief with available medications, resulting in substantial social and economic burdens.”
Ernst, in comments to the Free Beacon, said “Fauci was barking up the wrong tree when he decided to use government dollars on dog testing.”
“These inhumane practices have no place in our government—much less on the taxpayer’s dime,” Ernst said. “Thankfully, after voicing our concerns and shining a light on these heinous tactics, taxpayers can rest easy knowing their hard-earned money is not going toward dog abuse.”
Fauci also defended NIAID’s decision to use animals such as puppies as test subjects.
“I want to assure you that NIH and NIAID take the welfare of animals in research very seriously,” Fauci wrote, noting that such experiments are governed by strict ethical guidelines. “NIH has established guidance, procedures, and protocols to ensure that … scientists maintain the highest possible standards for the humane care and use of animals in research.”
Fauci also noted in the letter that, unlike other NIAID-funded experiments, the seasonal allergy trials were not slated to allocate funding to any labs in China. This practice has become increasingly controversial in the wake of China’s efforts to lie and cover-up its role in starting the coronavirus pandemic.
Devin Murphy, public policy and communications manager for the White Coat Waste Project—which first unearthed these experiments and others involving lethal tests on beagle puppies—said NIH and NIAID are on notice.
“This is a decisive victory in the War on Waste, and sends a message to big-spending white coats across the federal government: taxpayers should not be forced to pay for wasteful, unnecessary, and cruel animal experiments,” Murphy told the Free Beacon. “Taxpayers and animal lovers in Iowa and across the nation are grateful for Sen. Ernst’s outstanding commitment to government transparency and the responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars.”
Senate candidate John Fetterman took $3,500 trip to Ocean City, N.J., in June 2020
Pennsylvania lieutenant governor John Fetterman (D.) took a taxpayer-funded security detail on a family vacation to the Jersey Shore while publicly advocating strict coronavirus lockdowns.
Pennsylvania state police spent $3,500 for overtime, food, and lodging during Fetterman’s trip to Ocean City, N.J., from June 24-27, 2020, according to records obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. Fetterman, the Democratic Senate nominee for Pennsylvania, made the trip amid a surge of cases in both New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of Health warned at the time against nonessential travel. New Jersey’s governor threatened to crack down on Jersey Shore revelers because of a spike in cases there two days before Fetterman’s junket.
Fetterman has aggressively pushed lockdowns, masking, and other measures to fight the pandemic. He vowed in March 2020 that he and his family would “stay at home, minimizing social interactions and trips to indoor public places.” He criticized “a small, tiny minority” of anti-lockdown protesters in May 2020, and said “renegade counties” in his state had caused COVID-19 outbreaks by violating his administration’s stay-at-home orders. He also said school closures, which have caused learning and behavioral setbacks for school kids, were “an absolute necessity” in the fight against the virus.
Fetterman campaign spokesman Joe Calvello acknowledged the vacation but said that Alleghany County, where Fetterman resides, “was not in lock down” at the time of the trip. He said Fetterman has never claimed reimbursement for travel expenses and that he cut spending on travel, food, conferences and office supplies during his first two years in office.
“John and his family do take modest summer vacations like many folks in PA,” Calvello told the Free Beacon.
A LendingTree study found that 88% of Pennsylvania residents canceled their vacations in 2020 because of the pandemic.
Fetterman’s security detail stayed during the 2020 trip at the Port-O-Call hotel, the “premier resort” where the Fettermans appear to have stayed during other vacations. While Fetterman did not post photos during the 2020 jaunt, as he did in other years, he was reportedly spotted maskless on the Ocean City boardwalk with his wife during the trip. Fetterman has been an avid supporter of universal-masking requirements during the pandemic. He urged people to “stay home,” “stay apart,” and mask up. He joins an extensive list of Democrats who haveviolated their own masking or social distancing policies.
State police spent $1,149 on security during Fetterman’s family vacation from July 5-8, 2021, according to state records. The Fettermans visited Ocean City again last month, as Fetterman was recovering from a near-fatal stroke that has kept him off the campaign trail since the middle of May.
Iran, Russia, and China are gearing up to run a series of major war drills in Latin America in a show of force meant to signal how these militaries can reach the United States.
The war games, known as the Sniper Frontier competition, show that these malign regime from across the globe are uniting and “getting ready to make a loud statement that the region is ready to embrace the multipolar force,” according to the think-tank report, which focuses on Latin America’s embrace of authoritarian regimes. A key portion of Russia’s “military is prepping to bring, for the first time, some of these military games to the Western Hemisphere”—even as Moscow is bogged down with war in Ukraine.
The war drills are one of the starkest signs to date that Latin America’s coalition of anti-U.S. regimes is working to boost relations with Russia, China, and Iran. Maduro recently wrapped up a diplomatic tour of the Middle East in which he inked a 20-year strategic deal with Iran that laid the groundwork for an Iranian oil tanker to dock in Venezuela and offload Tehran’s illicit crude. “The strategic deal between Iran and Venezuela is meant to mirror similar strategic agreements that the Islamic Republic signed with China and Russia in recent years,” according to the think-tank report. Latin American regimes also are inking military pacts with Russia.
“Russia and its allies Iran and China are about to make a major show of force with the army games competition in August in Venezuela. But it’s important to understand that this force is molded by cyber-enabled, digital disinformation that is at the heart of how this kind of joint military exercise is used to legitimize authoritarian states and delegitimize democracies in the Western Hemisphere,” Joseph Humire, a national security analyst and executive director of the think tank, told the Washington Free Beacon. “By normalizing military movements of U.S. adversaries in the Caribbean, we run the risk of weakening the moral legitimacy of democracies in Latin America.”
There are also signs that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), the country’s paramilitary fighting force, is boosting its presence in Latin America.
In early June, a Venezuela cargo plane flying in the region “was discovered to have members of the Qods Force, the elite unit of Iran’s revolutionary guards, on board,” according to the think-tank report. “Gholamreza Ghasemi, a known weapons trafficker for the IRGC and manager of Qeshm Fars Air, was piloting the Boeing 747-300M that returned to Buenos Aires along with 4 other Iranian nationals and 14 Venezuelans.”
After the plane was grounded, “documents, personnel effects, and electronics were seized by Argentine authorities who discovered images of tanks, missiles, and other pro-IRGC paraphernalia on one of the mobile devices,” hinting at a larger Iranian-backed plot unfolding in the region.
Ghasemi reportedly made at least 13 trips from Iran to Venezuela in the past year and a half, raising red flags with the FBI and the Israeli government.
As Iran and Venezuela increase their military and economic ties, Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega—an ally of Venezuela’s Maduro—renewed a military pact with Russia “authorizing Russian troops, planes, and ships to patrol the Central American country’s borders and conduct joint military training exercises,” according to the report. The military agreement was signed amid Russia’s war with Ukraine, indicating that a presence in Latin America remains a priority for Moscow even as it faces pressure on its own borders.
Russia has been waging covert espionage operations in Latin America. An accused Russian GRU military intelligence agent was recently caught trying to obtain an internship at the International Criminal Court. The spy “had been cultivating his cover as a Brazilian national for years and may not have been working alone,” according to the think-tank report.
China also has been active in the region, though these efforts have received little media attention.
Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi last month inked several economic deals in Latin America, making calls to Uruguay, Nicaragua, and Ecuador. China’s Belt and Road Initiative, a program to increase the Chinese Communist Party’s global footprint, has made its way into Argentina, where it is working to build infrastructure projects.
“As Russia attempts to delegitimize the international financial system,” the think tank noted, “China has signed an agreement with a Switzerland-based bank to establish a reserve of yuan currency together with Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Chile to counter the U.S. dollar.”
The DMED, one of the best databases in the world, shows a disturbing trend with post-COVID jabs – dramatic increases in medical visits for malignancies, neurological and autoimmune diseases, and infertility. But after being exposed, DMED was shut down and its data spikes washed clean.
In the wake of the COVID jab rollout and additional boosters, a number of health conditions are on the rise, including cancer, most notably cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancers, and very aggressive blood and brain cancers
Cancer has been on the rise for decades, thanks to dietary factors, but the COVID jabs appear to dramatically accelerate the disease process. Many doctors report cancer patients with stable disease, and those who have been in remission for years, will suddenly and rapidly develop Stage 4 disease
A military whistleblower has come forward with data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) database showing dramatic increases in medical visits for cancers and other conditions, post-jab
For neurological side effects of the shot, four remedies that can be very helpful are fluvoxamine (an antidepressant that blocks cytokine production in neural tissues), pharmaceutical grade methylene blue (improves mitochondrial respiration and repair), near-infrared light (triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria) and hyperbaric oxygen therapy (boosts mitochondrial function, decreases inflammation and much more)
The COVID jabs also downregulate toll-like receptors 7 and 8, which allows latent viruses such as herpes EBV4 — Epstein-Barr, aka, mononucleosis — to flourish that would otherwise have been kept in check
Dr. Ryan Cole, an anatomic clinical pathologist with a subspecialty in skin pathology and postgraduate Ph.D. training in immunology, has been on the frontlines exposing the fraudulent COVID narrative.
Since 2004, he’s been operating his own business, a pathology laboratory, which gives him rare freedom and flexibility to comment on what he’s seeing. Most others would lose their jobs for speaking out the way Cole has.
Truth Telling Is a Risky Business
That doesn’t mean he hasn’t paid a price for speaking out about and defending real science though. He’s triple board certified and has 12 state licenses, and because of his stance against COVID recommendations, some of the credentialing organizations have taken action against him.
“I’ve seen 500,000 patients diagnostically in my career through the microscope. So, I have a long track record of diagnostics. I have not had a patient care complaint against me in 26 years of being a physician,” he says. “I still don’t, and this is what’s fascinating.
Of those 12 licenses, four were under attack, three are still under attack — in Washington, Arizona and Minnesota — [yet there’s] not a single patient care complaint. All the attacks against me have been political complaints to boards of medicine, which is not legal for them to do. Not a single one of those complaints is from a patient.
And then — really the most egregious thing — was ex parte, without me being present, without even sending a certified letter, the College of American Pathologists removed my fellowship status, which is defamatory.
I went back and found their complaint and looked at what they did, and I actually have a wonderful defamation lawsuit against them, because everything they did was anti-scientific. So, they can either restore [my fellowship] now, or just pay me a big check down the road. One or the other.”
He’s also lost about half of his business, as two insurance companies canceled him for “unprofessional behavior,” i.e., for sharing and discussing the science of COVID, and one of his best friends, whom he’s worked with for 12 years, canceled their business relationship as he didn’t want Cole’s outspokenness to affect his business. “All because of the defamation by the media, so to tell the truth in this day and age is a dangerous thing,” he says.
Suspicions Arose Early On
From his Ph.D. work in immunology, Cole was very aware of SARS-CoV-1 and MERS, having studied both, so when the warp speed program to develop a pandemic SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was announced, he became immediately suspicious.
“I thought, wait a minute, you can’t vaccinate against corona viruses!” he says. “This family of viruses is not amenable to vaccination, based on mutation rates. So, my concern was very high, early on.”
Cole’s lab ramped up PCR testing, using a cycle threshold (CT) of 35, rather than the recommended 40 to 45, as he knew that high a CT would result in 98% false positives. On a side note, pathologists not only assess tissue samples and biopsies, they’re also in charge of testing. The head of every major clinical lab is a pathologist. They’re basically in charge of quality control.
“As pathologist, we’re constantly looking at patterns, be it under the microscope or be it in lab data. We’re looking at blood reports. We’re looking at what’s out of range on blood reports. We’re looking at microbiology. We’re looking at molecular biology. We’re looking at cultures. We’re looking at pap smears. We’re looking, across the board, at those clinical parameters in addition to tissue biopsies,” he explains.
“I have 70 employees, and if there’s a blood smear that looks unusual, they bring it to me. If there are parameters on a test that look widely out of range, they bring it to me. And I call and talk to the clinician — [I’m the] doctor to the doctor. We have a consultation practice with the clinicians so I can help them understand what’s happening with their patient, and then they can make clinical decisions going forward.”
Post-Jab Cancer Explosion
One of the apparent side effects of the COVID jab that Cole has been warning and talking about is cancer. He explains:
“Obviously, during COVID, we saw some parameters change in blood tests. There was a concern about clotting. We saw elevated clotting factors. We know that the early variants were pretty severe in terms of inducing clotting, which was a shame because the whole world should have been simply using anti-inflammatories, steroids and anti-clotting agents, and so many more people would’ve lived.
My colleague, Dr. [Shankara] Chetty in South Africa, was having phenomenal success with antihistamine steroids and anti-clotting agents. So anyway, that first year, we saw drops in white blood cell counts, we saw decreases in certain subsets of T-cells. But when the shots rolled out, things changed.
At first I noticed kind of an innocuous little bump that we see usually in children. It’s a little virus called molluscum contagiosum [that causes] a little white bump.
Usually, by the time you’re a tween or early teen, you’ve built immunity to that and you never get them again, or rarely get them again. But after the shots rolled out, all of a sudden, in 80-year-olds, 70-year-olds, 60-year-olds, 50-year-olds, I started seeing literally a 20-fold increase in this little innocuous viral bump. And I thought, ‘Uh oh, this means they’ve lost immune memory’ …
Those subsets of T-cells that keep viruses in check are very important for keeping cancer in check. And this is where immunology jumps into the picture. All of us have some atypical cells, and we have the ‘Marines’ of our immune system, our natural killer (NK) cells. They’re on the frontline circulating. We have about 30 billion T-cells circulating in our blood, many of which are killer cells and NK cells.
Our other innate cells are our macrophages, monocytes and dendritic cells. They’re on that frontline. They’re shaking hands with every cell in your body all day long saying, ‘Friend or foe? Friend or foe? Oh gosh, this one has some mutations, it’s now a foe.’ They’ll poke a little hole in it, throw in a little enzyme called a grandzyme — a ‘hand grenade’ — blow up that cell, and we’re good.
But what happened after these shots rolled out is that many of those cell subsets started decreasing in number. The first cancer I saw uptick was cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancers. Usually, I would see maybe two endometrial cancers a month. All of a sudden, a few months after the rollout of the shots, I was seeing two or three a week.
Another subspecialty area of focus for me is melanoma. And I started seeing melanomas, not only in younger patients, as the shots dropped down in age cohort, but they were thicker. The other fascinating thing was they’re more aggressive in terms of how many dividing cells was present in each tumor. I’m still seeing this.
Beyond that … I’ve been traveling the country and the world quite a bit … and wherever I go now, I have doctors and nurses approach me saying, ‘What you’re saying, we’ve been seeing.’
I was having a conversation with a chair of a large oncology department in Tallahassee, and he said, ‘I usually see an aggressive brain cancer in a young patient maybe every decade.’ After the boosters rolled out, he saw five astrocytomas, five aggressive brain cancers, in one month.
Then, I’m in Jacksonville the next day, having a conversation with a family doctor. He said, ‘Gosh, it’s strange, I usually see a kidney cancer in a young patient every decade or so. I’ve seen five in the last month.’
Then I was in the UK a couple weeks ago. I had a doctor from Ireland who’s been a practicing family doc, GP, for 36 years, and he said, ‘I have seen more cancer in my young patients ever since the shots rolled out, and the booster, than I have ever seen in my entire career.’
Same thing, a nurse that works emergency department in the UK, [said she’s seen] not only the heart inflammation in young children, but cancers in young patients and aggressive leukemias. So everywhere I go, I have doctors confirming my observations … I’ve had many of them approach me and say, ‘Hey look, I’m seeing what you’re saying, but I can’t say it because I’ll get fired.’”
Cancer Spike Is Being Covered Up
Aside from what Cole has seen in his own lab, a military whistleblower has also come forward with data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) database showing dramatic increases in medical visits for cancer, neurological diseases, infertility, autoimmune diseases and several other conditions, post-jab.1
The DMED is one of the best databases in the world, as the Department of Defense keeps very close tabs on what’s happening with our troops. This DMED data was presented during a hearing led by Sen. Ron Johnson. A week after that hearing, the DoD froze access to the DMED, and when it reopened a week later, the data were all changed to eliminate the data spikes.
“That’s what was really shocking,” Cole says. “I think this is basically fraud to the level of Watergate, in terms of [there being] somebody behind the scenes, and then the private company that actually manages that database … manipulated it.”
The DoD has tried to explain this suspicious activity claiming a “bug” in the system had resulted in underreporting of medical conditions in the five years prior to 2021. The number of cancers and other health problems were actually higher in 2015 through 2020 than initially indicated, they said.
However, how can a program error cause data corruption for five consecutive years and then self-correct, resulting in perfect numbers for 2021? And how did they not notice the error earlier? Again, this is one of the best-kept databases in the world. And how come this “bug” only affected conditions that also just so happen to be known and/or suspected side effects of the jab?
Future Prognostication
Clearly, cancer has been on the rise for decades, thanks to dietary factors, but the COVID jabs appear to dramatically accelerate the disease process. There are no published studies to help us foretell the future, but based on what Cole has found so far, how long does he think it’ll be before conditions like cancer spiral out of control?
“That’s a great question,” he says. “One of the important findings I’ve heard from many of these clinicians is that many of their patients who have been cancer-free for three, four, five years, their PET scan looks great, no detectable disease, and after that second or third shot, all of a sudden there’s Stage 4 disease. It’s like wildfire.
And this goes back to immune suppressive mechanisms, the damage that the persistent spike protein and the persistent modified RNA (mRNA) cause. So, aggressive cancers arising very quickly are one thing we’re seeing. Because it’s a dose-dependent poisoning curve — in terms of the more spike you have circulating, the worse your immune system seems to be doing — the No. 1 thing is, don’t get another shot.
Because it is causing that immune suppression that’s allowing those cancer mechanisms. Over time … I would say we’re going to see a consistent twofold to threefold increase in certain cancers, endometrial cancers, breast cancers, cancers of the prostate, cancers that are testicular or ovarian, neurologic cancers.
This spike protein has a propensity to cross the blood brain barrier and invade neural tissues. We know what it does to mitochondrial activity in terms of inhibiting it, blocking it, ruining cytochrome C oxidase systems, decreasing ATP.
Cancer is a hypoxic state. When you don’t have good cellular activity and cellular respiration and hypo-oxygenation, you end up with mechanisms that can induce more aggressive cancer. So, I think, at a minimum, [there’ll be a] two- to threefold [increase] … over the next year or two.
We can only hope that the immune system can normalize and we come up with enough interventions and treatments that will reverse some of this, what some people call spikeopathy, or the different diseases that are being caused by this persistent spike. ‘I don’t know’ is the honest answer, but that would be my projection based on I’ve seen.”
Excess Mortality Has Dramatically Increased
Abnormal blood clotting is another commonly reported side effect of the jabs. Post-mortem investigations have revealed thick, extremely long rubbery clots, including in the arteries, which is rare. The longest Cole has seen was about two feet. We’re also seeing a lot of micro-clotting, heart inflammation (myocarditis), strokes and heart attacks — all of which can have lethal consequences.
It’s highly concerning that we have regulatory agencies allowing the most dangerous medical product ever released on humanity to persist in the marketplace.
— Ryan Cole, dr
In early January 2022, OneAmerica, a national mutual life insurance company, announced2 the death rate of working-age Americans (18 to 64), in the third quarter of 2021, was 40% higher than prepandemic levels. And this excess mortality was not due to COVID infection. Many of those deaths were in fact cardiac deaths and strokes, which fits the injury profile of the COVID shots.
“After they came forward, additional insurance companies said, ‘We’re seeing anywhere from 30% to 50% increase in claims as well.’ They have no horse in the race. They’re just observing. And I say that as a pathologist too. Look, I don’t create disease. I don’t prevent disease. I’m a reporter at the scene of the crash.
My job is simply to report patterns, and then we can scientifically confirm those data patterns. And the all-cause death is increased in those who’ve gotten two, three shots. Again, it’s a dose-dependent curve. The more spike your body is making, the worse people tend to do over time.
Even Walgreens came out a couple weeks ago and showed their data. Individuals that got shots are getting COVID at higher rates. Even the mainstream media finally, last week — I think it was Good Morning America — said, ‘It’s looking like the boosters are a bad idea because it’s immune suppressing people.’
So, we’re finally making some progress and getting traction in the mainstream where at least the narrative is cracking. There’s a crack in the dam and it’s starting to leak. Hopefully it’ll rush forward and people will go, ‘Whoa, this was a bad idea. Let’s stop this chaos.’ But the FDA is trying to roll it out on [infants] of all things now … It’s really tragic.”
Why Was the Most Toxic Part of the Virus Chosen?
Considering autopsies have shown spike protein is still present at least four months after their last shot, it seems reasonable to assume that severe health problems can arise months or even years down the road. In fact, we still don’t know if the body ever stops producing spike protein once this genetically modified mRNA is injected.
“We know the spike is the inflammatory aspect of the virus, and our cells are made into spike toxin factories,” Cole says. “Studies out of the Salk Institute show that the spike is the cytotoxic aspect of [COVID-19], so we’re giving a shot that makes the toxic part of the virus, and it’s persisting.
That’s why I think we’re going to see this consistent elevation of different diseases related to the spike, be it cardiac, strokes, chronic clotting conditions, individuals dying from pulmonary emboli … It’s highly concerning that we have regulatory agencies allowing the most dangerous medical product ever released on humanity to persist in the marketplace.”
Strokes in young people and children are also on the rise. Media are now trying to convince you that this is “normal,” but it is anything but. Historically, children and teens do not die from strokes. This is a brand-new phenomenon, courtesy of the COVID jabs.
Microvascular clots (microvascular infarcts) are also a known contributing factor, in the long term, to early onset dementia. So, that’s yet another potential health avalanche in the making.
Four Helpful Remedies
I’ve quickly become a fan of pharmaceutical grade methylene blue, as it’s been shown to improve mitochondrial respiration and aid in mitochondrial repair. At 15 to 20 milligrams a day, it could potentially go a long way toward resolving some of the fatigue many suffer post-jab and post-COVID. It may also be helpful in acute strokes. The primary contraindication is if you have a G6PD deficiency (a hereditary genetic condition), in which case you should not use methylene blue at all.
Another important remedy is near-infrared light. It triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria3 where you need it most. By mopping up reactive oxygen species, it too helps improve mitochondrial function and repair. Natural sunlight is 54.3% near-infrared radiation,4 so this treatment is available for free.
For neurological side effects of the shot, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant called fluvoxamine may be helpful. Cole explains the mechanism behind it:
“[Fluvoxamine] upregulates a receptor called sigma-1, which blocks another receptor called inositol-requiring enzyme 1, which is a precursor for cytokines. So, fluvoxamine will block cytokine production in neural tissues. And that’s why [it works]. It’s not because of its antidepressant effects. It’s a cytokine precursor blocker. So, you actually are decreasing a cytokine storm in neural tissues.
This is why one uses fluvoxamine. There are other SSRIs, but this mechanism is very specific to fluvoxamine. It’s a tough to tolerate drug for some people. It makes some people anxious and agitated, but if you can tolerate it for two weeks, you can really turn down those inflammatory pathways in many patients. I’m not going to say everybody, but I’ve seen it work in many patients.”
A fourth treatment suggestion is hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). This too can be phenomenally helpful for strokes, heart attacks, autoimmune diseases and neurodegenerative disorders. To learn more, see “Hyperbaric Therapy — A Vastly Underused Treatment Modality.”
IMPORTANT: COVID Shots Are Not Pharmaceutical Grade
Seneff also warned about potential unknowns arising from fragmented mRNA and impurities, as tests have shown these jabs really are NOT pharmaceutical grade, as you’d expect. Cole comments:
“These aren’t pure products, and I think this is a very important point. When Pfizer submitted vials to the European Medicines Agency to look at purity … they were in the 50% range … The TGA in Australia looked at it and said, ‘Look, these are only about 60% pure.’
This means you have a lot of fragmented sequences of mRNA that don’t have a stop or a start code on. They’re not coding for what you think they’re coding for. They’re coding for other tinier, shorter fragments. Are those mitogenic? Probably, but we don’t know. Can those reverse transcribe into our own DNA? Studies out of Sweden … show yes, they can …
And then, when they manufacture, they can’t spin and agitate these, so you get all these lipids that collect at the top of these big vats. So now you get some batches that are hyperconcentrated and some are hypoconcentrated. It appears about 5% of the batches are responsible for about 80% of the harms.”
Autoimmune Diseases of All Kinds Are To Be Expected
As explained by Cole in the interview, there’s a reason there’s never been a successful mRNA gene therapy product brought to market, despite 20 years of research effort. The persistence of synthetic mRNA with pseudouridine always caused too many problems in the animal trials to move into human trials. It caused autoimmune disease. It caused mutations. The manufacturers don’t even know if the nanolipid used to protect the mRNA is safe in humans.
“Based on the animal trials, we know there were problems and we can only predict that that’s going to happen in humanity. I want to be wrong, but from a basic immunology point of view, I don’t think I am,” Cole says.
“The nanolipid particles vary in size, interestingly. I’ve looked at some under the microscope. Some of them congeal and some of them stay tiny. But because of the fatty nature of them, they will carry their little mRNA and fractionated mRNA package to any cell in the body. And that’s the biggest concern. Now it has turned any cell in your body to a potential target [for your immune system].
An important paper came out in the European Journal of Immunology just about a month ago by Dr. Hagemann. There’s a condition called antibody dependent cellular cytotoxicity. What that means is that [the mRNA] sequence gets into your cell [and] that cell now becomes the spike factory.
That spike is on the surface of your cell. Now your NK cells that I talked about earlier say, ‘We better blow that cell up.’ So now, because there’s that spike on the surface, your immune system will destroy your own cells. This is another one of the detrimental effects.”
Pipeline Now Filled With Risky mRNA Shots
Making matters worse, even though the COVID shots have been shown to be a complete disaster, the drug industry is already working on dozens of different mRNA “vaccines,” thinking they now have carte blanche to put out whatever they want using this platform.
And the reason for this continued insanity is because our health and regulatory authorities are corrupted to the core. They are completely dishonest. They’re covering up the shocking harms, and unless something radically changes, they will allow dozens of equally dangerous mRNA gene transfer injections to be put out.
Reactivation of Latent Viruses
The COVID jabs also downregulate pattern receptors in your body called toll-like receptors. Specifically, toll-like receptors 7 and 8 are downregulated by the mRNA and pseudouridine in these shots. What does that do? It allows latent viruses to flourish that would otherwise have been kept in check.
“We’ve seen a big uptick in herpes family viruses, especially herpes EBV4, which is Epstein-Barr virus [aka] mononucleosis,” Cole says. So, for those with post-COVID or post-jab fatigue, long-COVID and those with MS-like symptoms, he recommends checking for Epstein-Barr.
About 80% of MS patients have high Epstein-Barr titers. “You will find that a lot of these individuals will have reactivated mono,” he says. For reactivated mono, methylene blue, HBOT and nebulized peroxide would all be indicated.
Fertility Under Attack
In the interview, Cole also reviews the potential impacts of the COVID jabs on the reproductive system. Menstrual dysregulation appears extremely common, as is the inability to become pregnant, despite trying for months, and spontaneous abortions are off the charts. The DMED database also showed a strong signal for fetal malformation before it was frozen and altered.
“What we’re doing to society and humanity with a previously never before used modality and product is causing horrendous harm to the human race, with no regard for science, with no regard for scientific integrity. It’s a machine gone amuck,” Cole says.
“There are darker forces behind it. A lot of people are making billions, but they’re killing people to do it. And it’s just so unethical what we’re experiencing societally. Yes, we’re causing infertility. Yes, we’re causing mutations in cancers. Yes, we’re causing heart attacks and strokes. Yes, we’re destroying the longevity of a younger generation. It is horrendous.
There’s no justification for any doctor who can look themselves in the mirror and say, ‘I feel comfortable giving this experimental product to my patients all day long.’ They need to reflect and realize they’ve lost their mind, [their] critical thinking skills.”
More Information
Sadly, almost everyone who’s credible and trustworthy has been censored and deplatformed at this point, so finding them can be a challenge. To follow Cole’s work, be sure to bookmark his website, RColeMD.com. You can also find him on the GlobalCovidSummit.org forum.
If you are vaccine injured, the Global COVID Summit has a blockchain-based forum where you can share your experience and it will never be taken down. You can’t be censored or deplatformed. Cole is available to answer questions in that forum.
They’re also starting up another website to compete with WebMD and similar pharma-run medical sites. It will eventually be available on DMED.com, which stands for “decentralized medicine.” This site is not yet live, but you can try it later. Cole will have a page there as well.
Other thought leaders worth tracking down and following include Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Paul Marik, Dr. Richard Urso, Dr. Paul Alexander, and Dr. Kirk A. Milhoan, a pediatric cardiologist, and his wife, Dr. Kim Milhoan, just to name a few.
“These have been wonderful leaders in this movement for truth and sharing science,” Cole says. “All of us are part of the Global COVID Summit. We are 17,000 doctors strong and it’s very important that people understand that.
I mean, that’s more doctors than they have at the CDC or the FDA or the NIH. This is a group of critical thinking people standing up for your health, your freedom and your right to your own bodily autonomy.
I think, going forward, as people are starting to wake up and part of this narrative is cracking, let’s come back together, let’s communicate, let’s be kind, let’s help each other get back to a more loving, peaceful, communicative society. I think if we can forgive — obviously, there are things we don’t want to forget, because we don’t want this to happen again — but try to forgive people and try to help people ‘come to’ again.
Just come back together in community. I think it’s important that we really try to circle the wagons again as humanity, and hopefully come back to our senses. That’s a hopeful message I would like to share.”
An Israeli study assessed the effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer) against the Omicron variant in children 5 to 11 years old using a large health care database and found the vaccine effectiveness (VE) to be 48 percent 7–21 days after dose 2 for symptomatic infection.
People with evidence of prior COVID infection by PCR, antigen, or serology test were excluded.
A U.S. study of a lesser scale found that VE in children declined from 60 percent to 28.9 percent from month 1 to month 2 after the second dose of Pfizer.
Cardiologist Sanjay Verma concluded that “therefore, if this Israeli study were to follow the children beyond 21 days, it is probable the VE would be lower than 48 percent.”
The authors of the study noted that assessment of “vaccine effectiveness against more severe outcomes such as hospitalization were not possible, because they were very rare in the study population.”
“In the US, American Academy of Pediatric data note a hospitalization rate of 0.7 percent in children based upon officially confirmed PCR+ infections. This study and this study previously found that 40 percent of pediatric COVID+ hospitalizations may have been over estimated when differentiating those hospitalized for COVID pneumonia versus those who were hospitalized for other causes but had incidental COVID+ testing during routine surveillance,” Verma noted.
“Therefore, the true hospitalization rate may actually be 0.42 percent of children infected with SARS-CoV2. CDC seroprevalence data report 75 percent of all children have already been infected (4.5 times more than officially confirmed PCR+ results). Perhaps the true SARS-Cov2 hospitalization rate for children then is as low as 0.09 percent. With such low incidence of COVID+ hospitalizations in pediatric population, most trials are not large enough to detect a statistically significant difference in COVID+ hospitalizations (or deaths) between vaccinated and unvaccinated children,” he concluded.
The study notes that 17 percent of the children were obese or overweight, while for the U.S. study, 35 percent of the children were so.
For the Israeli study, 43 percent of the population had received at least three doses of influenza vaccine in the past five years, while in the United States, an estimated 58 percent of children receive an annual flu vaccine, and some schools require the influenza vaccine.
The Israeli study also notes that “many of the children in our study cohort did not receive a second dose within the study follow-up period.”
“mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations do have a known risk of myocarditis and other rare severe adverse reactions. To better contextualize the risk-benefit analysis it would be helpful to know why the children did not receive the second dose,” Verma added.
“Statistics show the rate of COVID-19 associated hospitalization among children aged 5 to 11 is 0.0008 percent,” writes Dr. Joseph Mercola. “In real-world terms, that’s so close to zero you basically cannot lower it any further. Yet, despite such reassuring data, children in this age group are urged to get two to three doses of the COVID jab, even though side effects of the injection could harm them for life, or kill them.”
Former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx revealed that the federal government was relying on “hope” that COVID-19 vaccines would prevent infection when officials publicly stated that Americans who received the jab would become immune to the virus.
The admission came during a line of questioning by Rep. Jim Jordan, who inquired to the former Trump administration official: “When the government told us that the vaccinated couldn’t transmit it, was that a lie or is it a guess?”
“I think it was hope that the vaccine would work in that way,” she replied.
Dr. Birx’s comments follow a host of studies determining that the COVID-19 vaccine doesn’t confer protection as comprehensively as natural immunity. Data during the Omicron surge also showed that vaccinated people in Germany comprised the overwhelming majority of individuals contracting the variant.
“You were part of this effort when you were in the previous administration. And you’re saying in this administration that you can’t rule out the fact that our government was lying to us when they told us the vaccinated could not get the virus,” Rep. Jordan continued.
“I don’t know about their discussions that they had in the task force. So I can’t tell you that,” she began, adding “I can tell you as a family member who had individuals that were susceptible, of course, we got everybody vaccinated. But we still used layered protection during surges.”
Despite being vaccinated, Dr. Birx took additional precautions “because I knew potentially vaccine immunity would wane like natural immunity waned.”
“There was evidence that every four months, reinfection was occurring in South Africa.”
Revelations about the questionable efficacy of the vaccine come amidst the White House, Democratic governors, and left-wing companies attempting to mandate the jab for employees and customers. Users sharing data highlighting the weakness of the vaccine on social media platforms such as Facebook have also been hastily censored by left-wing “fact-checking” organizations.
The rate of hospitalization for COVID among children is so low, it’s basically zero. Then why is it so important to jab babies and toddlers two or three times, even though side effects of the injection could harm them for life – or kill them?
Statistics show the rate of COVID-19 associated hospitalization among children aged 5 to 11 is 0.0008%.1 In real-world terms, that’s so close to zero you basically cannot lower it any further. Yet, despite such reassuring data, children in this age group are urged to get two to three doses of the COVID jab, even though side effects of the injection could harm them for life, or kill them.
As noted by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation in the video below, myocarditis — one of the recognized effects of the COVID jab — “has a mortality rate of 25% to 56% within three to 10 years, owing to progressive heart failure and sudden cardiac death.”
Sudden cardiac death is what the media and public health agencies are now glibly referring to as “sudden adult death syndrome” or SADS. The older and more appropriate description for SADS is “sudden arrhythmic death syndrome,” but they don’t even want to use the word “arrhythmic” anymore, as that tells you what the death is really caused by, and many are now aware that the jab can cause heart inflammation.
By avoiding the word “arrhythmic,” it’s easier for them to pretend as though people are dying for no apparent reason, and certainly not because of the COVID shots. Still, real-world facts tell us that SADS didn’t take off until after the shots were rolled out, and the vast majority of young healthy people who suddenly die for no apparent reason have been jabbed.2
Also, understand that if your child or you are injured by the shot, you cannot sue the drug company for damages and, so far, the U.S. government has rejected all but one of the claims filed with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).3 At the current pace of about 18 claims a month, it would take 38 years just to get through the current backlog, Reuters has noted.4 Basically, many may die before their case even gets through review.
COVID Jab Authorization Granted for Babies
As if the situation were not bad enough already, June 15, 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory panel — the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) — unanimously approved (21-0) to grant Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID shots for infants and young children.5
Pfizer’s EUA is for a three-dose regimen (3-microgram shots) for children 6 months to 5 years old, while Moderna’s EUA is for a two-dose regimen (25-microgram shots) for children 6 months to 6 years.
In the video at the top of the page, Steve Kirsch, president of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, interviews reporter Toby Rogers, who endured the entire nine-hour day of the recent VRBPAC meeting.
The day before that meeting, June 14, Rogers published6 a written summary of Pfizer’s trial on young children, which he referred to as “an embarrassment.” “Any VRBPAC member who votes Aye on this junk science application should be removed from his/her job,” he wrote. Apparently, they all need to go.
In the interview, Rogers laments the fact that the VRBPAC members remain “locked in their information bubble” and won’t allow any conflicting data to influence their preconceived biases.
As noted by Rogers, they have a sacred duty to protect public health, and they’re being flippant about it. They’re ignoring data, they’re ignoring the pleas of the vaccine injured, they’re ignoring serious questions, they’re ignoring everything except the flimsiest bits and pieces upon which their narrative is built. Rogers called the experience “heartbreaking.”
VRBPAC Refuses to Answer Lawmakers’ Questions
The VRBPAC members aren’t even swayed by concerns from lawmakers. They simply ignore their questions too. As reported by The Defender:7
“The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) ignored pleas from experts, the vaccine injured and a congressman representing 17 other lawmakers to halt authorization until questions about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines for the nation’s youngest children could be properly addressed …
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said there are many unanswered questions … ‘I’m deeply concerned that the push to vaccinate these children is nothing more than a dystopian experiment with unknown consequences,’ Gohmert told the committee. ‘Some of us have outlined these questions in a letter8 to VRBPAC but have not received any answers, and I pose some of them here.’ Gohmert said:
‘Number 1, why has the FDA refused to release the hundreds of thousands of pages of data from preapproval manufacturer studies, post-approval adverse events data and other post-approval manufacturer data?
Number 2, what is the cardiac risk factor in administrating these COVID vaccines to children?
Number 3, world-renowned immunologists have raised concerns about potential antibody-dependent enhancement, or ADE, resulting from COVID vaccines, and since ADE was a problem in prior unrelated respiratory vaccine trials, we need to know what studies, if any, the FDA has that it’s used regarding ADE from COVID vaccines in children 5 and under or any age group. Can the FDA affirm there’s no risk of ADE for vaccinated children?
Number 4, if widely approved among children 5 and under, how many lives, if any, does FDA estimate will be saved next year? Given the injuries reported in the FDA’s VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] system, how will FDA evaluate serious vaccine injuries versus serious COVID outcomes?
Number 5, is it possible the proposed COVID vaccines in young children could create increased risk in future novel COVID variants?
Number 6, why has the FDA recently lowered the efficacy bar for COVID vaccines for youngest children? This change significantly lowers the expected benefits from any COVID vaccination for young children and it’s of particular concern given that over 70% of that age cohort already is seropositive.’
Gohmert said these questions and 13 other questions posed by lawmakers are critical and deserve answers from the FDA and VRBPAC prior to any EUA with the ‘accompanied protection for liability for all harm done.’”
Trial Showed COVID Jab Increases Infection Risk in Babies
In the video above, you can see Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, with a forced grin on her face, claiming “rigorous scientific review” has proven the shots to be safe and effective in infants and young children.
The video also features excerpts from a video in which Dr. Clare Craig, a diagnostic pathologist and “lover of data,”9 reviews what this “rigorous scientific review” actually found and what the FDA and CDC aren’t telling you. To hear Craig’s full summary of how Pfizer twisted its clinical data for young children, check out the video below.
Craig points out that of the 4,526 children, aged 6 months to 4 years, who participated in Pfizer’s trial, 3,000 didn’t make it to the end of the trial. Why did two-thirds of the children drop out? Oftentimes, this happens when side effects are too severe for the participant to continue. Here, we don’t know why two-thirds of the participants were eliminated, and “on that basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void,” Craig says. Moreover:
•Six of the children, aged 2 to 4 years, in the vaccinated group were diagnosed with “severe COVID,” compared to just one in the placebo group. So, what this actually shows is that the likelihood the shot is causing severe COVID is higher than the likelihood that it’s preventing it.
•The only child who required hospitalization for COVID was also in the “vaccinated” group.
•In the three weeks following the first dose, 34 of the children in the vaccinated group and 13 of the unvaccinated children were diagnosed with COVID. That means the children’s risk of developing symptoms of COVID within the first three weeks of the first dose actually increased by 30%. These data were ignored.
Between doses two and three, there was an eight-week gap, and the vaccinated arm again experienced higher rates of COVID. This too was ignored. After the third dose, incidence of COVID was again raised in the vaccine group, and this was ignored as well.
In the end, they only counted three cases of COVID in the vaccine arm and seven cases in the placebo group. They literally ignored 97% of all the COVID cases that occurred during the trial to conclude that the shots were “effective” in preventing COVID.
•While they claim the triple-dose regimen reduced COVID, 12 of the children actually caught COVID twice in the two-month follow-up, and 11 of them were vaccinated.
•The confidence interval for Pfizer’s jab is -370% at the lower end of the 95%, which suggests children who get the jab are nearly four times more likely of getting sick with COVID than their unvaccinated peers.10
Unscientific and Unethical Behavior
As reported by The Defender:11
“Combining all ages together, Pfizer said its three-dose regimen for children 6 months to 5 years old was 80% effective at preventing illness from the Omicron variant based on preliminary data from its clinical trial.
The 80% number was calculated 30 days after the third dose. As noted by committee members, the efficacy number is likely to go down after 30 days and post-approval monitoring was suggested.
Moderna said its two-shot vaccine was about 51% effective against infection from Omicron in children under 2, and about 37% among kids 2 to 5 years old, citing different efficacy numbers than what was reported by the company in March.
In a March 23 press release, Moderna said its vaccine in the 6-month to 2-year age group was only 43.7% effective. In the older age group, the company said its vaccine was 37.5% effective. A top official at Moderna has already said a booster will be necessary.”
As noted by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, vaccinating infants and children who have no need for the shots and don’t benefit from them, just to “protect” adults, violates medical ethics. And since those who are jabbed still readily transmit the virus, the children are actually put at risk for no reason at all.
It’s All About Securing Indemnification
🧐So I’m guessing everyone is wondering why the FDA voted unanimously to give not one — but THREE shots of the C@ViD 💉to the youngest of children when there’s N🚫 emergency.
It is IMPERATIVE they have this approval. R. obert K. ennedy Jr. tells us why: pic.twitter.com/denjlTchMF
So, how can we explain the irrational behavior of the FDA and CDC? Why don’t any of the data matter? Why doesn’t the science matter? Why don’t any of the red flags matter? And why are they handing out EUAs when the criteria for EUA are satisfied? Products must satisfy four criteria in order to get EUA:
There must be an emergency
A vaccine must be at least 30% to 50% effective
The known and potential benefits of the product must outweigh the known and potential risks of the product
There can be no adequate, approved and available alternative treatments (drugs or vaccines)
Unless all four criteria are met, EUA cannot be granted or maintained, yet here we are. COVID, by any reasonable measurement, is no longer an emergency, there are plenty of adequate alternative treatments, and the potential benefits in no way, shape or form outweigh the potential risks — especially not in infants and children under 5. That’s three out of four criteria that, clearly, are not met.
The short answer to the question, “Why are the CDC and FDA acting so irrationally?” is that both agencies are corrupt to the core and are no longer in the business of protecting public health. They are securing profits for the drug industry, and getting EUA for infants and young children is a crucial step toward securing permanent legal indemnity for the drugmakers.
They need this last remaining age group to be included under the EUA, because once the emergency is finally declared ‘over,’ the next phase of liability shielding requires that the shots receive approval by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Sam DOnce the vaccine is on the childhood vaccination schedule, the vaccine makers are permanently shielded from liability for injuries and deaths that occur in ANY age group, including adults.
As explained by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in the short video clip above, they need this last remaining age group to be included under the EUA, because once the emergency is finally declared “over,” the next phase of liability shielding requires that the shots receive approval by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
This is the group that decides which vaccines are to be added to the childhood vaccination schedule. Once the vaccine is on the childhood vaccination schedule, the vaccine makers are permanently shielded from liability for injuries and deaths that occur in ANY age group, including adults.
The only way to break that indemnity is by proving the vaccine maker knew about the safety issues and withheld that information. You can learn more about this indemnification process in “The Real Reason They Want to Give COVID Jabs to Kids.”
So, the end goal is permanent immunity against liability for injury and death from the COVID shots in all age groups, and to get there, they first need the EUA to cover all children. After that, the ACIP approval becomes more or less a matter of rubber stamping. This is why they’re playing Russian roulette with the health of infants and young children.
Murder Has No Statute of Limitation
That said, if fraud can be proven, all indemnity falls by the wayside, and there’s no statute of limitation when it comes to murder, which some insist is what’s happening here.
The video above features “To The Lifeboats” podcaster Sam Dodson’s comments to the FDA VRBPAC during its open public hearing session to approve the COVID jabs for children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years. In a rapid-fire manner, he reviews several data points that ought to have put a halt to these injections, but didn’t; several instances where the FDA knew harm was occurring from these shots, or would occur, and they did nothing.
Another public comment was submitted by an as-yet unidentified individual. The submitted comment was provided to and reposted on Coquin de Chien’s Substack. Here are some select pieces:12
“This comment is NOTICE of possible criminal liability to Lauren K. Roth and members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee who owe duties of care, diligence, good faith, and loyalty in recommending ‘for’ or ‘against’ the EUA amendment for COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in children 6 months through 4 years of age.
Only two deaths are listed herein to establish knowledge. If the amendment is approved, it will have been done by committee members ‘knowing’ of felony crimes in context. Your investigation of these deaths should include death certificates, autopsy records, witness interviews, and immunization records.
Massachusetts Death Certificate 2022 SFN 5980 is a 7yo girl died January 18, 2022 listed as died from U071 ‘COVID-19,’ B49 ‘unspecified mycosis,’ J450 ‘predominantly allergic asthma,’ and R091 ‘pleurisy.’
VAERS_ID 2038120 is a 7yo girl in Massachusetts, who received her 2nd dose 1/13/2022 and was reported to VAERS 1/15/2022. PRIOR_VAX states, ‘Severe nausea and vomiting from 5 min post vaccination and for the next 8-10 hours.’
SYMPTOM_TEXT states, ‘Spiked a 103 fever, severe stomachache, has not had a bowel movement since the day before vaccination, which makes today 3 days without one. First vaccine caused severe nausea and vomiting from 5 minutes post injection and for the next 8-10 hours.’ This little girl suffered immeasurably 4 to 5 days as her intestines shut down due likely to impeded blood vessels servicing intestines.
Massachusetts Death Certificate 2021 SFN 56611 is a 48yo man died 11/16/2021 listed as died from U071 ‘COVID-19’ and E669 ‘OBESITY.’ SFN 56611 is known to have died less than 24 hours after inoculation.
In both cases, the Medical Examiners listed the cause of death as ‘COVID-19,’ when it was clearly not COVID-19. And in both cases, the Medical Examiners omitted listing causes Y590 ‘Viral vaccines’ and T881 ‘Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified,’ when these clearly were proximate and actual causes.
Death certificates from the state of Massachusetts are sent to the CDC, a federal entity. Thus, fraud on a state death certificate is a federal crime as it affects federal death records. Several federal felony crimes apply in this instance and are listed below.
If you dismiss this NOTICE and recommend the EUA amendment without first investigating these two deaths, you become liable for inchoate crimes and the felony crime of ‘misprision of felony.’ If a single person subsequently dies as a result of the amendment, all the elements will have been satisfied for you to face felony murder charges or involuntary manslaughter. Qualified immunity is not a valid defense …
There were found sixty likely C19 vaccine deaths in a 25-minute perusal of the 2021 and 2022 death certificates, which extrapolates to hundreds, probably thousands of C19 vaccine deaths in Massachusetts.
Refusal to investigate these fraudulent records is a crime that, because of the felony murder aspect, has no statute of limitations. Five, ten, or twenty years from now, if a federal prosecutor were to learn of this NOTICE, he or she would have significant evidence to bring charges for felony murder.
In summary, this NOTICE places you in a position requiring you to investigate these deaths prior to recommending the amendment. If you dismiss this NOTICE, you may be criminally liable for involuntary manslaughter, felony murder, and a list of federal crimes and inchoate crimes … Comment Tracking Number l4d-m52d-ge4m.”
Florida Bucks the Trend
My home state of Florida now stands out as the only U.S. state that is recommending AGAINST the COVID jab for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds. Parents can still get their infants jabbed if they want, but the official state recommendation is not to do it, as there’s simply no scientific or logical rationale for doing so.
Florida also did not preorder any extra doses for this age group.13 In a June 18, 2022, Substack article, Dr. Robert Malone addressed the latest EUA authorization for infants and young children, and applauded Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ decision to buck the trend. It’s hard to believe he is the only governor in the U.S. who resisted this murderous threat to the children:14
“Have you looked at the VAERS data lately? The CDC apparently has not. In the USA alone, there have been 831,801 adverse events, of which 12,776 are life threatening. There have been 63,978 hospitalizations. There have been 13,293 deaths and 14,232 permanent disabilities from these vaccines.
True, these are ‘unverified’ — but previous research has shown that the VAERS system under-reported adverse events associated with vaccines, not over-reported … Then there are the international post-vaccine adverse event summaries.15
The CDC, under Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) has now admitted16 that even though they had promised to analyze the VAERS data before advising about these vaccines for children, they did not.
The VAERS data were NOT taken into consideration before the authorization of these genetic agents for babies and young children. Frankly, this is shocking. So shocking, it is hard for me to even write about it.
Now, approximately 430 children with other severe illnesses have died with COVID in the last 2.5 years (that would be 172 per year). Plus there have been 2,600 hospitalizations of children, most with underlying conditions — over that 2.5 year period. These numbers show that even before Omicron, in the case of children, COVID is less severe than flu …
Omicron in children is much less severe. We know this. The scientific evidence is clear. Yet the FDA goes back to data from the DELTA variant when discussing the effects of this virus … Governor DeSantis again has it right. It is time to stop. Parents must stop. The time is now to just say no.”
Last but not least, if you’re still unsure whether the COVID shot is the “right” choice for your child, please read through Dr. Byram Bridle’s “COVID-19 Vaccines and Children: A Scientist’s Guide for Parents,”17 published by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance. It goes through how the shots work, what the known side effects are, results from the clinical trial, the effects of the spike protein and much more.
Newt talks with former Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, about her new book, “Hostages No More: The Fight for Education Freedom and the Future of the American Child.”
From coronavirus lockdowns to critical race theory in the classroom, it has become clear that America’s schools aren’t working for America’s students and parents. Newt’s guest has been fighting to improve education for every American student for nearly 40 years. Betsy DeVos spent four years serving as Secretary of Education under President Donald Trump. Her new book, “Hostages No More: The Fight for Education Freedom and the Future of the American Child” is out now.
The risk was 13 times higher with Pfizer vaccination
A French peer-reviewed study concluded that for both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, the risk of myocarditis skyrockets a week after vaccination.
The risk of myocarditis after mRNA vaccination was 8 times and 30 times greater than unvaccinated control groups for BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna), respectively.
The largest association for myocarditis following the Moderna jab was 44 times higher risk for persons aged 18 to 24 years.
As for the Pfizer shot, in relation to the same age group, the risk was 13 times higher.
Infection with the Chinese Communist Party virus yielded, by comparison, a 9 times greater risk of the same condition.
Myocarditis refers to the inflammation of the heart muscle—a life-threatening condition. There are many established causes for this heart condition. The leading cause—according to modern science’s most recent discoveries—is viruses; but during the pandemic, COVID mRNA vaccines have earned a place as a top suspect for myocarditis.
The new study’s goal was to provide an assessment of association with vaccines across sex and age groups.
“Both SARS-CoV2 infection and COVID mRNA vaccines have been associated with myocarditis. Knowing the spike protein’s affinity to ACE2 receptors in the heart and spike protein’s injury to cardiomyocytes (cells of the heart), the association of myocarditis with SARS-CoV2 virus or spike protein-based mRNA vaccination was not entirely unexpected,” Dr. Sanjay Verma, a cardiologist, told The Epoch Times via email.
Verma also thinks the CDC’s analysis “erroneously suggests” that risk of myocarditis after SARS-CoV2 infection is greater than after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.
“For the cases of myocarditis after SARS-CoV2, CDC uses officially confirmed PCR+ ‘cases,’ even though their own seroprevalence data demonstrates that far more people have been infected than officially conformed PCR+ ‘cases.’ For example, seroprevalence data as of Feb 21, 2022, reveals 75 percent (about 54 million) of all children have been infected compared to 12 million officially confirmed PCR+ ‘cases’ (i.e., the actual number of kids infected is 4.5 times greater than PCR+ ‘cases’). Therefore, calculating the risk of myocarditis after SARS-CoV2 infection, the rate noted by CDC would therefore need to be reduced by 4.5 times. Thus far, CDC has not adjusted its COVID-19 morbidity and mortality data accordingly,” said the cardiologist, who practices in Coachella Valley, California.
The study analyzed 1,612 cases of myocarditis and 1,613 cases of pericarditis in France from May 12, 2021, to Oct. 31, 2021, involving 32 million people aged 12 to 50 years who received 46 million doses of mRNA vaccines.
It is limited by using solely hospital discharge diagnoses. Therefore, it does not include those who may have died before being hospitalized or those whose symptoms were not severe enough to be hospitalized.
“There have been reports (pdf) of autopsy-proven myocarditis after vaccination and anecdotal evidence of patients being dismissed by ER and never being hospitalized. Adjusting for these excluded subsets may yield even higher risk than reported in this study. Follow-up of the patients in this study was limited to one month after discharge. However, a previous cardiac MRI study found about 75 percent of patients with vaccine-associated myocarditis can have persistent MRI abnormalities 3–8 months after initial diagnosis,” Verma said.
The authors of the study didn’t analyze the effect of booster vaccination since it is not yet recommended for young adults in France.
In the United States, however, booster injections are mandated by colleges and universities, employers, and even some state public health departments irrespective of age or prior infection.
“In a preprint follow-up to their peer-reviewed study of myocarditis after vaccination, analysis found continued incremental risk of myocarditis after booster vaccination. In fact, while many countries have refrained from recommending COVID vaccination in very young children because the risks do not justify the benefits, the U.S. stands alone in recommending it in the youngest of kids,” Verma said.
A research paper published on May 18 studied the pandemic control measures—which included vaccine and mask mandates, as well as isolation and contact tracing—of Cornell University, which was almost completely vaccinated, and found these policies were “not a match” for the Omicron variant and its rapid spread.
Sudden Adult Death Syndrome
Recently, a new term has been highlighted in media outlets: “sudden adult death syndrome,” or SADS.
Underlying factors for SADS include undiagnosed myocarditis, inflammatory conditions, and other conditions that cause irregularities in the electrical system of the heart, thereby triggering cardiac arrest.
Data compiled by the International Olympic Committee shows 1,101 sudden deaths in athletes under age 35 between 1966 and 2004, giving an average annual rate of 29, across all sports. Meanwhile, between March 2021 and March 2022 alone—a single year—at least 769 athletes have suffered cardiac arrest, collapsed, or have died on the field, worldwide.
Denmark’s Christian Eriksen is taken away on a stretcher after collapsing on the pitch during the Euro 2020 soccer championship group B match between Denmark and Finland at Parken Stadium in Copenhagen, on June 12, 2021. (Stuart Franklin/Pool via AP)
Among EU FIFA (soccer/football) athletes, sudden death increased by 420 percent in 2021. Historically, about five soccer players have died while playing the game each year. Between January and mid-November 2021, 21 FIFA players died from sudden death.
Joseph Mercola contributed to this report.
The Epoch Times reached out to the CDC for comment.
THE LATEST GRIFT FROM THE ECOHEALTH CHIEF INVOLVES A NUMBER OF KREMLIN-LINKED RESEARCHERS.
Peter Daszak – a controversial U.S-based researcher whose collaborations on coronavirus research with a Chinese laboratory were funded by Anthony Fauci – isolated Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus strains in Russia using funds from the Russian government in a recently published research paper, The National Pulse can reveal.
Daszak, 49, appeared to play a critical role in the origins of COVID-19, as his organization, the ‘EcoHealth Alliance’, facilitated a “longtime” joint research effort with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is believed to be the source of the virus. Throughout the pandemic, Daszak also featured prominently in promoting the “natural origins” theory while simultaneously discrediting supporters of the “lab leak” theory, most notably in the role of the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 investigator.
His latest study appears to be yet another controversy. Daszak, who is originally British, is listed as the sole U.S. researcher on the paper: “Identification and Genetic Characterization of MERS-Related Coronavirus Isolated from Nathusius’ Pipistrelle Near Zvenigorod (Moscow Region, Russia).”
DASZAK’S LATEST GRIFT.
The paper was published on June 10th 2022 and counted an additional 11 Russian researchers from Kremlin-run facilities including the Federal Service on Consumers’ Rights Protection and Human Well-Being Surveillance and Moscow State University.
The study was funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, the national science funding body of the Russian government, and the state-run Russian Science Foundation.
Researchers conducted “analyses of bat viromes,” which “have been used to identify novel viruses with potential to cause human infection.”
“We characterized the fecal virome of 26 samples collected from six bat species captured during 2015 in Moscow Region. Of these 13/26 (50%) samples were found to be coronavirus positive,” continued researchers.
“We sequenced and assembled the complete genome of a novel MERS-related Betacoronavirus from Pipistrellus nathusii, named MOW-BatCoV strain 15-22.”
The capture and sampling of bats were carried out by Moscow State University researchers in the summer of 2015.
Appearing to use similar tactics as researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Russian scientists and Daszak focused on the spike protein. The spike protein allows viruses to penetrate host cells and cause infection and is believed to have been manipulated by researchers in Wuhan to become more lethal to humans.
“To predict and analyze the interaction of MOW-BatCoV Spike glycoprotein with DPP4 receptors of the different mammalian species, the three-dimensional structures of these proteins were obtained by homologous modeling. The DPP4 proteins of two bats (Myotis brandtii and Pipistrellus kuhlii), the hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus), domestic cat (Felix catus) and mouse (Mus musculus) were used for analysis,” explains the paper.
Analysis of the complete genomes the novel coronavirus discovered in the paper shows that it “falls into clade of human/camel’s MERS viruses together with a few bat viruses.”
Gretchen Whitmer says the state has added 25,000 auto jobs since she took office. It has actually lost thousands.
Michigan Democratic governor Gretchen Whitmer says she’s added 25,000 “good-paying auto jobs” during her tenure. The state has actually lost thousands of auto jobs on her watch, labor statistics show.
In a June 2 press release, Whitmer said she was “proud” to announce Michigan has “added nearly 25,000 auto jobs since I took office.” The Democrat roughly three weeks later repeated the claim, writing in a “mobility and electrification” fact sheet that she “is ensuring Michigan lives up to its legacy as the place that put the world on wheels by creating nearly 25,000 good-paying auto jobs.”
Bureau of Labor Statistics data, however, contradict that claim. Whitmer inherited 169,500 auto jobs when she became governor in January 2019, according to the agency. As of May 2022, that number is 166,700—a decrease of nearly 3,000 jobs.
Whitmer’s deceptive declaration shows how the Democrat is attempting to rebound on economic issues following her stringent stay-at-home orders, which shuttered local stores but deemed marijuana dispensaries, lottery ticket vendors, and big-box retailers “essential.” While Whitmer has touted leading the “best economic recovery in Michigan history,” a June WalletHub report ranked Michigan 46th in unemployment claim recovery.
Michigan Rising Action communications director Mary Drabik said Whitmer’s “gaslighting” on auto jobs is “not surprising.”
“When Gov. Whitmer’s claims are this far detached from reality, it becomes difficult to believe anything she says,” Drabik told the Washington Free Beacon. “But coming from the governor who claims her nursing-home policies saved lives and vacationed in Florida while telling Michiganders to avoid flying south, the gaslighting is not surprising.”
Whitmer’s office acknowledged that the governor’s claim stems from “the number of jobs announced since January 2019,” some of which are not yet actualized. Still, Whitmer communications director Bobby Leddy said the governor “is proud of her record of job creation, particularly in the auto industry, as we move to cement Michigan’s legacy of manufacturing.” Leddy did not address why Whitmer’s statistic does not account for jobs that have left the state since 2019.
This is far from the first time Whitmer has faced criticism for failing to deliver on a claim. In April 2020, the Democrat pledged to give back a portion of her salary for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic. But Whitmer ended the pledge just five months later in September, even as her indoor gathering restrictions and public face mask requirements lasted for 15 months.
Whitmer, who implemented a policy that required nursing homes to accept positive coronavirus patients who were discharged from hospitals, is up for reelection in November after a roller coaster of a first term. Whitmer’s national profile exploded during the beginning of the pandemic thanks to her harsh restrictions and public feud with then-president Donald Trump. Whitmer went on to ramp up those restrictions, which sparked large protests, particularly as the Democrat defied her own rules.
Whitmer’s potential Republican opponents include political commentator Tudor Dixon, chiropractor Garrett Soldano, and businessman Kevin Rinke. Republican voters will choose their nominee during Michigan’s August 2 primary.
There is no safety profile for the effects of vaccines on children
As the Biden administration rolls out vaccines for the nation’s youngest children (6 months to 5-year-olds), Dr. Jeffrey Barke, chief medical officer at the Convention of States, said there is absolutely no evidence supporting that these youngest children are at any serious risk of death from COVID-19 and should not get be broadly vaccinated.
“I think it’s important that we tell the truth first, and then let parents and adults make informed decisions about whether or not to get vaccinated,” Barke said during a recent interview with NTD’s Capitol Report. “And to recommend this product to 6-month-olds makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. So, to start with, there is no COVID emergency, especially as it relates to younger people. It simply doesn’t exist.”
Barke referenced the CDC’s own website, saying that according to the CDC’s data, just over 1,000 children have died since the beginning of the pandemic as of the interview. “While every death of course is tragic, the reality is every one of those deaths occurred in a child that had significant underlying comorbidities. Healthy children simply do not die from this illness,” said Barke.
Meanwhile, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha made a contrary statement, saying that the infant vaccines “have been thoroughly tested. Millions of children above the age of 5 have gotten these vaccines. They’re exceedingly safe,” Jha told CBS News in a June 20 interview.
The CDC last Saturday signed off on giving both Moderna’s and Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to infants and children between 6 months and 5 years old. It came after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel unanimously voted to authorize the use of the vaccines.
Jha also said while the majority of children likely have natural immunity, getting the vaccines will help keep children out of the hospital if they get it again.
The White House is echoing the FDA and CDC’s message to get young children vaccinated.
Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House’s COVID-19 response coordinator, speaks to reporters in Washington on June 2, 2022. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
“COVID has been quite common in children actually. We think maybe almost 70 percent of kids have ended up getting infected with COVID, [but it’s] still worth getting the vaccine. It really offers an extra level of protection, an extra layer of protection,” said Jha.
Barke disagreed with Jha and said there is a risk to young children from vaccines themselves because they have no long-term safety profiles.
“It’s ridiculous what’s going on here. And the part that makes me the saddest is the FDA and the CDC already have trust issues amongst the American public, and for them now to authorize and recommend that a 6-month-old receive a COVID-19 vaccine when they’re not at risk, and there have been no long-term safety studies with these products, is going to erode whatever little trust is left in these organizations,” said Barke.
He added that if a child has an adverse reaction to the vaccine, that child’s parents could not sue for damages because the authorization prevents the companies from being held liable.
“[The vaccine] is experimental by definition. A product that’s being used under emergency use [EU] authorization definitionally is investigational, and it makes no sense whatsoever. The EU authorization gives these vaccine companies blanket liability protection,” said Barke.
In addition, the virus has mutated since the vaccines were developed, so we don’t know if these vaccines protect against strains like Omicron, Barke said.
North Carolina’s largest hospital systems made billions of dollars in profits during the pandemic, while simultaneously taking $1.5 billion in taxpayer-funded COVID-19 relief funds, according to a report released Wednesday by the state treasurer’s office.
The report, titled, “North Carolina Hospital Systems Profit During COVID” was published by State Treasurer Dale Folwell who called on the hospital systems to “use their profits to lower costs for patients” or “return unnecessary, taxpayer-funded relief dollars.”
According to the report, Atrium Health, Cone Health, Duke Health, Novant Health, UNC Health, Vidant Health, and WakeMed made a combined $5.2 billion in net profits in 2021 and recorded $7.1 billion in growth in cash and financial investments from 2019 to 2021.
Six of those hospital systems enjoyed higher net profits than in the years before the pandemic, the report states.
That growth came as the seven hospital systems reportedly took $1.5 billion in taxpayer-funded COVID relief meant to help support hospitals who were struggling through the pandemic, as well as another $1.6 billion in Medicare Accelerated and Advance Payments from 2020–2021.
“These systems boasted huge reserves, but they still took the bulk of the relief funds meant for struggling hospitals—and then failed to dedicate more than a fraction of their windfall to increasing charity care for their suffering patients,” Folwell said in a press release unveiling the report.
‘Enough Cash on Hand’
The report analyzed the audited yearly financial statements of the state’s seven largest hospital systems as well as Medicare cost reports, and was conducted in collaboration with experts at the North Carolina State Health Plan and the National Academy of State Health Policy.
It was peer-reviewed by researchers at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Among the seven hospital systems, Duke Health outpaced them all with a 41 percent net profit in 2021, according to the report. In 2019, Duke Health’s net profit margin was 11 percent.
Meanwhile, Atrium Health reportedly took the most amount of money in taxpayer relief dollars—$589 million in COVID relief and another $438 million in Medicare advance payments.
“Atrium Health then made a $1.7 billion net profit after its merger with Wake Forest Baptist Health in 2021,” according to the report.
Despite taking the massive government handouts, the report states that all seven of the hospital systems had huge amounts of resources compared to rural hospitals and independent physicians, while the majority had “enough cash on hand to operate for more than half a year without any incoming revenue, as well as billions of dollars in cash and financial investments.”
The report further found that despite their reported profits, the hospital systems shared little of it with disadvantaged patients, noting that a third of North Carolina hospitals spent less on charity care in 2020 during the peak of the pandemic.
Across 104 hospitals, charity care spending rose only $246.5 million from 2019 to 2020, while some hospitals increased billing of poor patients that were eligible for charity care.
Atrium Health sued hundreds of patients, according to the report.
‘Politically Motivated’
“While health care workers suffered on the front lines, hospital executives made billions on Wall Street,” said Folwell. “None of these nonprofit systems pay any property, income or sales taxes. Many failed to fully honor their charitable mission even when thousands of North Carolinians lost their businesses and their jobs during the pandemic.”
Folwell is urging the hospital systems to either return the taxpayer money or commit to reducing hospital price inflation. The Treasurer is also supporting the Medical Debt De-Weaponization Act which aims to bolster accountability, transparency and consumer protections on medical debt.
“We have a duty to hold hospital executives accountable for wrecking the financial health of thousands of patients and transferring wealth from citizens to them,” Folwell added.
In a statement Wednesday, the North Carolina Healthcare Association, which represents the state’s hospitals, called Folwell’s report “politically motivated” and said it “falsely demonizes health systems for applying for and using Provider Relief Funds (PRF) to respond to the COVID-19 crisis.”
“As with other politically motivated statements by the Treasurer, the report conveniently forgets the reality on the ground of what hospitals were facing … Cherry-picking financial data, and then spinning it, is not reflective of the many immense struggles and challenges facing the hospital field, including a workforce shortage criticism along with skyrocketing costs for supplies, equipment, drugs and labor, and near-historic levels of inflation,” the NCHA statement said.
Report Is ‘Charged And Misleading’
Charlotte-based Atrium Health also issued a statement saying it was being “attacked” by the report.
“It’s troubling that health systems like Atrium Health are being attacked while we are still caring for communities that are recovering from the pandemic,” Atrium, the city’s largest hospital system, said.
“The reality is the $719 million in provider relief funds we have received covers less than half of the adverse $1.55 billion financial impact we have incurred as a result of the pandemic.”
Duke Health said it had “a total community investment of $823 million, including $141 million in financial assistance to nearly 270,000 patients” while noting that COVID relief funds had helped it keep its 25,000 staff members employed during the pandemic.
UNC Health called the report “charged and misleading” and said it “paints a baseless picture of excess relief funds as ‘profit’ and seems to intentionally obscure the fact that advanced Medicare payments were not gifts—UNC Health has already paid the federal government back almost all of the $305 million it received from advance Medicare payments.”
The Epoch Times has contacted Cone Health, Novant Health, Vidant Health, and WakeMe for comment.
USAF pilot Lt. John Bowes dreamt of flying and protecting the country his entire life—since he was a child.
He is heartbroken now that he had to put his religious faith over his dream due to the COVID vaccine mandates within the U.S. military, but believes that God is helping him get through the tribulation and that he has a duty to speak up.
The 24-year-old was an F-16 student pilot but was taken out of training and prevented from flying since September of last year when he first submitted his religious accommodation.
“I exercised my constitutional and statutory right to receive a religious accommodation. And then I was, as a direct consequence of doing that, removed from training to fly the F-16. I personally believe that is religious discrimination,” Bowes told The Epoch Times.
He made clear that his views are not representative of the USAF.
“Now that my religious accommodation is denied, I have been formally removed from training. I’ve received a letter of reprimand, which is a disciplinary action that goes on my record as an officer. And I’ve been told that I’ll be processed for discharge here pretty soon,” he said.
Bowes says that nine months ago he filed an equal opportunity complaint with the Air Force Equal Opportunity office, but has not heard back from them so far.
“I’m absolutely heartbroken,” Bowes said, “it’s sad to see that my dream is at risk over something like the COVID vaccine, which doesn’t stop you from getting or spreading COVID.”
The Epoch Times reached out to the USAF for comment.
What’s more, cases of myocarditis—inflammation of the heart muscle—and pericarditis—inflammation of the lining outside the heart—have spiked dramatically since the COVID vaccines started being administered worldwide.
“My faith is what gets me through it because I know that God has called me to speak up about these mandates, and God has called me to stand up for the beliefs that I have—that he gave me, and I’m risking my dream and my career and my future and my financial stability, and my honor as an officer, which is being tainted by these disciplinary actions. All because of my oath to my faith, my oath to God which got me here in the first place, as well as my oath to the Constitution of the United States, which all officers take,” Bowes said.
“And so I’m not here to be rebellious. I’m not here to stick it to the man and so many service members aren’t here to do that, either. We’re simply doing what we swore to do. And standing up for our religious beliefs.”
Lt. John Bowes (Courtesy of John Bowes)
As the June 30 deadline nears for compliance with the U.S. military’s COVID-19vaccine mandate, U.S. Army officials publicly claim a very small percentage of its members are unvaccinated, reporting 96 percent or more of its members are fully vaccinated.
However, the Army’s vaccination rate could be far lower than 96 percent, an anonymous active-duty senior Army official told The Defender.
Sanctity of Life
As a Catholic, Bowes believes in the sanctity of human life and doesn’t want to use the COVID vaccines because aborted fetal cell lines are involved in either the production or the testing of these.
“That action, the use of that vaccine is not in line with my belief that all human life is sacred and ordained by God to exist on this earth. And the use of abortion, in order to accomplish the production of these vaccines, is just morally abhorrent to me,” Bowes said.
Disclosed CDC emails show that they have been producing and culturing human stem cell lines.
Bowes added that he knows “a lot of service members” whose primary argument in their religious accommodations is the sanctity of their genetic material and not wanting to be forced into having it altered.
According to official data from the Air Force, over 9,500 religious accommodations requests had been denied approval as of June 14.
This is despite Archbishop for the Military Service Timothy Broglio saying in October 2021 that: “The denial of religious accommodations, or punitive or adverse personnel actions taken against those who raise earnest, conscience-based objections, would be contrary to federal law and morally reprehensible.”
Bowes personally knows a few pilots who “developed myocarditis from the vaccine, and they don’t fly anymore.”
Pilot Shortage
The Air Force has been struggling with pilot shortages for years now.
Former Air Force Chief of Staff General David Goldfein testified before congress in 2017 about a shortage of aviators, writing in 2016 that the situation was a “quiet crisis.”
A DoD report (pdf) from 2019 noted that by the end of FY 2018, the Air Force was “short 2,000 pilots out of a total inventory of 18,400.”
“I know of personally more than 700 pilots who are actively unvaccinated and have filed a religious accommodation or have filed for a medical exemption or something of the sort,” Bowes said.
A letter from November 2021 (pdf) from DoD pilots submitting religious accommodation for vaccination to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees details the impacts based on an analysis of a group of 357 pilots that did not want to take the COVID vaccines.
Their estimated value was totaled at $7.8 billion tax dollars, 4,842 years of cumulative service, and 14 years of service on average.
Nineteen percent of them support the mission of nuclear deterrence, 69 percent are instructors, and nine percent are Air Force Weapons Instructors or Navy TOPGUN graduates.
“The implications of 700 pilots is pretty extreme,” Bowes said in an interview with LifeSite news.
Attorneys and doctors have also charged that the FAA is violating its own rule that pilots should not fly after having taken medications that have been approved for less than a year.
An advocacy group called Freedom Flyers is assisting pilots to come forward and speak out about their conditions.
“Many of these pilots are afraid to come forward because if they come forward they lose their flight physical, they lose their flight medical. So they’re continuing to fly. We have a lot of pilots that are flying with chest pain and neurological conditions, because if they come forward they lose their careers,” Josh Yoder, a spokesperson for Freedom Flyers told The Epoch Times.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed in late 2021 that a person died from blood clotting after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine that had been linked with an increased risk of blood clotting, but did not alert the public for two weeks, newly obtained emails show.
Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a CDC official, told colleagues at the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Dec. 2, 2021, “We have confirmed a 9th TTS death following Janssen vaccination,” according to emails obtained by The Epoch Times through a Freedom of Information Act request.
TTS refers to thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, a condition that features low platelet levels combined with blood clots.
Officials had recommended a nationwide pause on the administration of the vaccine, produced by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) subsidiary Janssen, in April 2021 after six women experienced TTS after J&J vaccination and three died. But they lifted the pause after determining the vaccine remained safe and effective.
The condition was not discussed much in the ensuing months, despite the CDC laterreporting that five additional deaths occurred before Aug. 31, 2021. Shimabukuro gave a single update, in mid-October 2021, saying five total deaths had been reported.
That was until December 2021. Twelve days after Shimabukuro alerted colleagues of the ninth death, the FDA urged healthcare workers not to administer the vaccine to people with certain conditions because of the TTS risk. Two days after that, Dr. Isaac See, another CDC official, informed the public during a meeting that nine deaths had occurred post-vaccination.
It’s unclear when the CDC learned of the sixth, seventh, and eighth deaths.
The CDC takes reports made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and attempts to confirm the reports, including post-vaccination deaths. A higher number of post-vaccination TTS deaths have been reported to the system than the number the CDC has verified.
One day after Shimabukuro confirmed the ninth death, his message was forwarded by Dr. Amanda Cohn, another CDC official, to CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky.
“See below, information on a 9th completely tragic death from TTS,” Cohn wrote.
“Many thanks for letting us know … any tragic case,” Walensky responded.
The emails were partially redacted; one was fully redacted.
Four days after Shimabukuro’s email, CDC officials gave an update on post-vaccination TTS to the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group, part of the agency’s vaccine advisory panel, in a closed-door meeting. The Epoch Times has asked for presentations and audio from the meeting.
It took 14 days to update the public. That happened during a virtual meeting of the advisory panel that anyone was free to tune into.
Asked about the delay in making the public aware of the deaths, the CDC provided a comment from the team that works on verifying deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
“For all reports classified as serious (which includes deaths after vaccination), VAERS (within one business day of receiving the report) requests all available medical records, including death certificates and autopsy reports, for the reported patient. For some reports, including some potential reports of TTS, consultation with experts to determine if the report meets a standardized case definition is performed. Regarding verified reports of TTS where the patient died, these processes occurred during their usual timeframes,” the team said.
During the virtual meeting, advisers recommended the CDC say the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was not “preferred” because of its link to TTS. Walensky endorsed the recommendation.
The agency said it conducted an updated analysis of reports and identified 60 confirmed cases, including nine confirmed deaths. It said it was limiting the availability of the shot because the reported cases and deaths were “not appreciably lower than previously reported.”
A group of doctors is urging top government officials to quickly reverse recommendations that have left children in isolation for days and advice that virtually every child get a COVID-19 vaccine.
“We strongly urge you to revise the CDC’s COVID-19 guidelines with regards to testing, isolation, and vaccine recommendations for children to ensure that public health policies are not doing more harm than good,” the group, Urgency of Normal, wrote in a June 21 open letter to Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House’s COVID-19 response coordinator, and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The CDC’s guidelines say that people, including children, who are exposed to COVID-19 should quarantine for at least five days, and encourage widespread COVID-19 testing.
The agency also recommends that all children 6 months of age or older get a COVID-19 vaccine, following the recent authorization of the Moderna and Pfizer shots for kids under 5.
The doctors noted that many European countries, U.S. states, and other areas have updated COVID-19 policies to greatly reduce periods of quarantine, COVID-19 testing frequency, and forced vaccination.
They’re asking U.S. officials to adapt to a “test-to-treat” approach, which would focus on recommending vaccination and treatments to those at the highest risk from COVID-19, which are primarily the elderly and others with serious underlying health conditions.
The CDC should also change its vaccine recommendations, which have led to vaccination mandates at colleges and even some lower-level schools, to state that children getting a vaccine should be discussed between the individual and their doctor.
“The emergency phase of COVID-19 is over. We call upon the CDC to update current guidelines to reflect the era of endemic management in which COVID-19 infections are treated similarly to other seasonal respiratory viruses, which do not require routine testing or isolation. It is time to join our peer countries in recognizing the importance of restoring equitable and maximal access to education, sports, and social connectedness for all children. Their health and well-being depend on it,” the group said.
The White House and the CDC did not return requests for comment.
Dr. Jeanne Noble, an associate professor of emergency medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, and one of the doctors, told The Epoch Times in an email that the group has not yet heard back from the White House or the CDC.
“The timing of this letter is to push for normalization of children’s social and extracurricular activities over the summer, so that our highest need students can benefit from unfettered access to summer enrichment programs and that all kids enjoy summer camps and sports without exclusion based on testing and vaccination requirements,” Noble said.
“It is our hope that moving beyond pandemic policies over the summer will further pave the way for a full return to a normal school year in the fall, free of COVID-specific restrictions.”
The nation of Austria has suspended its controversial COVID-19 vaccine mandate, with government officials citing concerns about the policy infringing on individual freedoms.
Ministers for health and constitutional affairs announced the move on June 22nd, just six days before individuals who failed to comply with the policy would have begun receiving fines for their decision.
The measure was the most comprehensive mandate within the European Union, as it applied to all adults with virtually no exceptions. It had been in effect since February 5th, 2022, but enforcement formally began on March 15th, 2022z
“We will… suspend the vaccine mandate in accordance with the principle of proportionality,” constitutional affairs minister Karoline Edtstadler remarked during a news conference.
“Why? Because there are many convincing arguments at the moment that this infringement of fundamental rights is not justified.”
Edtstadler detailed how the Austrian government was acting on the recommendation of a panel of experts that must regularly review the public health and constitutional law aspects of the recently overturned mandate.
She and Health Minister Johannes Rauch, however, said the vaccine mandate could yet be reintroduced if necessary, with the next review due within three months.
Austria’s decision to scrap its COVID-19 vaccine mandate comes amidst controversy in the U.S. over resident Joe Biden’s efforts to force the jab on federal workers. Many private companies have issued similar ultimatums to employees, despite a host of recent studies demonstrating the harmful side effects of the vaccine.
Studies have show the COVID-19 vaccine affects male and female reproductive organs while other research suggests the efficacy of the jab is far weaker than natural immunity.
Despite the fact that more research into the effects of the COVID-19 vaccine needs to be done, pharmaceutical giants including Pfizer and Moderna have increased their lobbying efforts to record-breaking highs in terms of personnel hired and overall money spent.
Twitter has suspended a doctor for sharing the study that shows men who received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine had lower levels of semen and a loss in motile sperm count.
Dr. Andrew Bostom, with the Brown University Center For Primary Care and Prevention, shared the peer-reviewed study on June 19.
Twitter informed Bostom that the missive violated its policy against “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19, according to a message reviewed by The Epoch Times. It suspended Bostom’s account over the post.
“It seems to fit into the whole pattern of silencing open discussion,” Bostom told The Epoch Times.
Twitter did not respond to a request for comment.
Bostom’s post included a link to the Israeli study, which analyzed semen and sperm in men who received two doses, or a primary series, of Pfizer’s vaccine.
The study was published online ahead of publication in Andrology.
Researchers found that the men had lower levels of semen concentration and lower numbers of sperm after receiving a vaccine.
They alleged that the issues were resolved after 150 days, but figures from the paper actually suggested that was not the case. The authors wrote that the values “did not reach statistical significance.”
In his post, Bostom wrote that primary vaccination with Pfizer’s vaccine “temporarily impairs semen concentration and total motile count among semen donors, with apparant rebound by ~5mos, but no data on boostering effect.”
“Does boostering yield another decline?” he wondered.
“I kind of understood what they really showed, which is that some of the metrics, whether it was the counts or the motility, were still depressed,” Bostom told The Epoch Times. “And I used their terminology … I didn’t do anything to exaggerate their findings.”
The authors said they excluded men with boosters.
“I just pointed out that if this happens with the first series of vaccinations, maybe if they take these guys and have data on people that were semen donors and they had boosted them, when they followed them after the booster, you’d see another round of depression, and maybe it would be depressed—who knows—would it be depressed more? Would it be depressed, less? Would the effect last longer? We just don’t have any data on that,” Bostom said. “So that was the only other thing I put into my tweet—that we just don’t know what the effect of boosters is going to be. I don’t know why any of that was such a big deal.”
At least one other prominent figure has shared the study and not been affected.
Dr. Peter McCullough, a cardiologist, shared on Twitter a screenshot of The Epoch Times article along with an image from the study highlighting how men still had lower semen concentration and sperm counts when measured 150 days or more after getting the vaccine.
“Indiscriminate use instead of targeted, risk-stratified EUA rollout has led to a myriad of concerns. Never broadly apply a brand new experimental biologic agent on a large population without assessment of risk stratification,” McCullough wrote. “Over-used and now uninvited concerns in young men.”
Retired U.S. Army Major General Paul Vallely is vigorously sounding the alarm against a potential communist takeover of the country and is also very concerned about the mandatory COVID vaccination of all members of the military.
“The mandatory vaccines and boosters … under Department of Defense guidance and directives to the commands throughout the Armed Forces have caused a great deal of controversy. Number one: those that declined mandatory vaccination under the First Amendment religious rights,” Vallely told The Epoch Times.
He believes that there is no need to force COVID vaccines on them, as “these are the healthiest men and women we have in the country.”
“They can take [the vaccines] as an option, but we’ve got to stop this mandatory vaccination. It’s hurting the armed forces. And of course, our enemies see that—the Russians, the Chinese, the cartels. And then [there’s] the wokeism, the teaching of critical race theory. So there are a lot of things going on that are affecting the status and the readiness of our forces right now. I’m very worried about that.”
According to U.S. Army Public Affairs, 97 percent of the active army and 88 percent of the army reserve is completely vaccinated. It also states that 2,846 exemption requests have been refused and there have been 3,330 official reprimands, as of April 13. However, an anonymous whistleblower told The Defender that the actual vaccination rates may be significantly lower.
The Army had separated 669 soldiers “for refusing the lawful order to receive the COVID-19 vaccine,” as of May 19.
Vallely served for 31 years in the U.S. Army and retired in 1992 as the deputy commanding general for the U.S. Army Pacific in Honolulu, Hawaii. He has over 15 years of experience in special operations, psychological operations, and civil-military operations.
He graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, and earned his commission in the Army in 1961, at the height of the Vietnam war.
After serving two combat tours in Vietnam, Vallely also served in several other overseas theaters in Europe and Pacific Rim countries. Vallely also served on U.S. security assistance missions and civilian–military relations tours all over the world.
Paul E. Vallely MG U.S. Army (Ret). (Courtesy of Paul E. Vallely)
Time Spent on CRT and Communist Ideology Could Be Used for Gun Training
“I think the Russians and the cartels and the Chinese, they’re letting us destroy ourselves from within. They don’t have to even do anything. It’s self-destruction within our own government. They see that, and of course, that makes us very, very vulnerable when we have critical race theory and ideology and what we call indoctrination, rather than putting forth the training and education that has to go on within our military,” Vallely said.
He believes that there “absolutely” is an agenda to transform the republic, that the country is being dismantled from within, and that a socialist takeover has already made substantial progress.
“When you take away to teach a critical race theory and communist ideology, you’re taking away from the time that could be used for learning how to shoot better, how to operate airplanes better, take care of airplanes through maintenance; and even within the medical corps of the armed forces, it has affected many the doctors and nurses. So it’s a terrible thing. They need to stop it right now. They need to stop enforcing the mandates,” he stated.
“This is terrible tyranny that’s going on.”
How to Stop a Communist Takeover
Despite the gloomy prospects, Vallely keeps a positive spirit and thinks that if the country is to be preserved, Americans need to awaken and act, starting at the local level—and quickly turn the tides before it’s too late.
“We have to have the sheriffs and the governors enforcing the 10th Amendment. We need to have that happen. I’m not sure that the elections are going to be fair in November.
“People have to stand up before we are led into a really bloody civil war. And that’s what it’s looking like.”
Vallely further asserted that there are “high-tech oligarchs” that, behind the scenes, want to “change the direction of this country, and they’re doing it. They’re dismantling this country. They don’t believe in our Constitution, for example they don’t care about the First Amendment or Second Amendment. They want to completely dominate the society culturally.”
“2022 is the awakening of America. We need to wake up to see what’s happening to our country and to our government—the demolishing of our Constitution, increased burglaries, crime, and deaths within our cities. We got to enforce the law. These are all things that are on the table that must be done to turn the country around. If not, we’ll be destroyed,” Vallely concluded.
Communist China is getting more totalitarian – even with foreign investment fund management firms operating on its soil. The Chinese regime is now requiring all foreign firms – including American ones – to set up an internal unit for surveillance and supervision by the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Other Chinese national laws require all companies in the country, including foreign firms, to establish internal CCP organizations. However, those laws have been largely symbolic.
Until now.
Ignites Asia — an extension of Financial Times — first reported that in May, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) implemented new changes to its industry rules governing publicly offered securities investment funds.
This week it reported that one of the provisions in the new CSRC rules requires that these companies establish a CCP organ within their companies.
According to a translation by Ignites Asia, the provision states:
Fund management companies shall, in accordance with the provisions of the Articles of Association of the Communist Party of China, establish party organizations, carry out party activities, and provide necessary conditions for the activities of party organizations.
State-owned fund management companies shall, in accordance with relevant regulations, integrate party leadership into all aspects of corporate governance, and include party building work requirements into the company’s articles of association, so as to implement the legal status of party organizations in the corporate governance structure.
Logan Wright – leader of China Markets Research for the Rhodium Group – told Ignites Asia that “It’s another small signal that China’s system is increasingly diverging from global business practices and norms, rather than converging with them over time.”
Wright added that the requirement for foreign businesses to accept a CCP unit within their structure will “add to the perceived political risks associated with deepening foreign investment in China.”
Coincidentally, the new rules specifically governing fund companies come as major U.S. and international investment firms are working to bring branches of their business to China.
A Shanghai-based lawyer who works with foreign business managers told Ignites Asia that this rule is the first explicit “party organization” requirement for the public fund industry. The lawyer, who declined to be named due to the political sensitivity of the matter, told Ignites Asia the new rule applies to foreign-Chinese joint ventures and the Chinese subsidiaries of wholly foreign-owned companies working in China. U.S. multinational firms like BlackRock, Fidelity, and Neuberger Berman are among these entities expanding into the Chinese market.
Maybe it’s time these huge American investment businesses stop ‘trading with the enemy’ and focus their powerful financial efforts elsewhere.
World Health Organization (WHO) Director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus reportedly admitted to a senior European politician that the virus that causes COVID-19 most likely came out of a Wuhan lab. The Daily Mail reports that Tedros made the admission citing a catastrophic lab accident.
The disclosure comes on the heels of a WHO investigative report that was published earlier this month, concluding that the pandemic may have started at a Wuhan lab and that Chinese authorities have been blocking access to crucial data.
At the same time, Jeffrey Sachs, leader of the Lancet Commission on COVID-19, now says that he is convinced that the pandemic started in a lab and that SARS-CoV-2 was created with the aid of U.S. biotechnology.
Sachs made his stunning admission last week at a conference in Spain where he had been invited by former Spanish prime minister José Luís Zapatero.
The admissions from two of the world’s most prominent COVID-19 authorities, who also happen to be establishment stalwarts with a record of appeasing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), is a significant development in the search for the origin of the pandemic.
Early in 2020, just as the pandemic was starting to unfold, Xiao Botao, a whistleblower from China, published an article claiming that the virus had come out of a Wuhan lab. The whistleblower’s paper was quickly removed from the internet and an all-hands-on-deck effort to scrub and censor the idea of a lab leak quickly ensued.
Two institutions played a key role in that scrubbing effort. The World Health Organization and esteemed British medical journal The Lancet.
White House Chief Medical Adviser on Covid-19 Dr. Anthony Fauci at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Md., on Feb. 11, 2021. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
WHO chief Tedros and his organization famously pushed CCP propaganda, including lavishly praising Xi Jinping and claiming that the virus did not transmit between humans. Tedros also spearheaded efforts to “combat the spread of rumors and misinformation.” In addition, two separate WHOinvestigations aggressively dismissed the lab leak theory.
For its part, the Lancet published a statement that maligned anyone who deigned to so much as contemplate that the virus might have come out of a lab.
That Lancet statement—which was published before most Americans even knew that there was a pandemic spreading around the globe—was signed by a number of notable leaders in the field of virology and set the tone for the corporate media’s coverage.
It also served as a warning to other scientists and science publications around the globe that lab-leak discussions were off-limits.
Most virological research in the Western world is funded through the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci—who was himself instrumental in shutting down any discussion of the lab leak theory—and Jeremy Farrar, the British pharmaceutical trust director who sits on billions of dollars’ worth of grant money and has long-standing ties to China’s CDC head, Gao Fu. Farrar co-authored the Lancet statement.
The Lancet’s editor, Richard Horton, is a recipient of the CCP’s Friendship Prize. Before the pandemic, he published a glowing tribute to Xi and the Chinese regime. Horton later went on Chinese state TV where he praised Chinese authorities, impugned Western governments, and asserted that claims that the pandemic might have started in a Wuhan lab were part of a “pandemic of disinformation.”
Horton also set up a commission to investigate “the nature, origin, and prevention of zoonotic diseases.” The focus on zoonosis—or a natural origin—meant that The Lancet had predetermined what the commission was supposed to conclude.
Sachs was appointed as head of the commission while Peter Daszak, the president of EcoHealth Alliance who helped Fauci funnel U.S. taxpayer money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was made a member of the group. It was Daszak’s enormous conflicts of interest, as well as the emergence of new evidence pointing to a lab leak, that led to the eventual disbanding of the Lancet Commission in September 2021.
An exterior view of building one of National Institutes of Health (NIH) inside Bethesda campus, in Bethesda, Md., on Nov. 21, 2020. NIH funds majority of biomedical research in United States. (grandbrothers/Shutterstock)
However, the group did not publicly dismiss the natural origin narrative until last week, when Sachs attended a conference in Madrid where he made his surprising admission:
“I chaired a Commission for the Lancet for two years on COVID. I’m pretty convinced it came out of U.S. lab biotechnology, not out of nature.”
Sachs’s statement is not only hugely significant because of his role as chairman of the Lancet Commission but also—and perhaps even more so—because of his admission that U.S. biotechnology was used to create SARS-CoV-2.
We have known for some time about the cooperation between the so-called godfather of gain-of-function experiments, Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina, and the director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli. In fact, it was the disclosure of that collaboration in a Jan. 31, 2020, article in Science magazine that led Fauci’s team to scramble to cover up the NIAID’s involvement with, and funding of, Shi’s lab.
Baric and Shi’s collaboration traces back to 2015 when they created a modified coronavirus that was not only uniquely able to latch on to human cells but also able to efficiently replicate in human lungs. While the virus they created was not SARS-CoV-2, the virus did have the attributes that we would later find in SARS-CoV-2.
Their collaboration proved that Shi had gained the technical know-how to do the kinds of experiments that might have resulted in COVID-19. Baric also sent transgenic mice with human lung receptors to Shi’s Wuhan lab. Humanized mice mimic human lung tissue and act as experimental stand-ins for humans. They are used to test whether newly created viruses can replicate and spread quickly among humans.
It is not a big leap to go from infected lab mice to infected lab workers. This is even more evident when one considers that the Wuhan lab conducted its coronavirus research under biosafety level two conditions, which even Baric acknowledged as dangerous, stating that there is much less oversight and that lab-acquired infections occur much more frequently at biosafety level two than at higher levels.
After the pandemic started, Chinese authorities directed their labs to shift coronavirus work to biosafety level three labs.
An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei Province on April 17, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)
But even that might not offer sufficient protection against a biosafety accident. Late last year, a lab worker in Taiwan contracted COVID-19 from handling infected lab animals in a biosafety level three lab.
To underscore how significant Sachs’s sudden shift is, he has also co-authored a paper in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, calling for an independent investigation of information held by U.S.-based institutions that would reveal the origin of the pandemic.
While it is correct that Chinese authorities have been concealing crucial data from the Wuhan lab, as well as data on early patients, many of the answers to the pandemic’s origins are held in the United States by organizations such as Fauci’s NIH and NIAID, by the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, by Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance, and by Baric’s lab, which provided the Wuhan lab with biotechnology.
Sachs’s observations further highlight the significance of the highly unusual furin cleavage site, the part of SARS-CoV-2 that makes it so virulent. It has been known since the start of the pandemic that SARS-CoV-2 is the only coronavirus of its kind that has a furin cleavage site. But Sachs now goes further, pointing out that the critical amino acid sequence of SARS-CoV-2’s furin cleavage site insertion happens to be identical to one that is present in the human body, strongly suggesting that it was deliberately inserted into a SARS-like virus.
Lastly, Sachs is also raising the issue of the 2018 partnership agreement between the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Daszak’s EcoHealth, and Baric that had the specific goal of inserting such furin cleavage sites into SARS-like viruses.
It has always strained credulity that a bat virus traversed all of China without leaving a trace only to suddenly erupt on the doorsteps of a lab that was known to have been creating COVID-like viruses. Sachs and Tedros appear to have come to the same conclusion.
The fact that the two institutions at the center of efforts to aggressively push the natural origin narrative have now changed course will give considerable momentum to finally get to the bottom of what really happened at the Wuhan lab. It also—very belatedly—vindicates Xiao Botao who, at great personal risk, tried to tell the world where the virus came from.
According to a new report that just came from the government watchdog agency responsible for overseeing the NIH, it turns out that nearly three-quarters of the scientists and researchers who accept NIH grant money—meaning, people who receive NIH tax-payer funding to conduct research—fail to properly report their ties to foreign countries and companies.
Specifically, the Department of Health and Human Services Inspector-General’s office found that approximately 69 percent of the people who receive NIH research grants don’t properly report all of their ties to foreign entities—specifically, the Chinese Communist Party.
Furthermore, this same lack of transparency also applies here at home. According to another report from Open the Books, it turns out that in a 10-year time span, government scientists—like Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Francis Collins, and so on—received somewhere between $350 million to $400 million in royalty payments.
But the disclosure documents are so redacted that we don’t know which company is paying how much money to which scientist and for which patent.
In a stirring and spot-on campaign email, Florida’s Republican Governor Ron DeSantis declares war on the Far Left calling it a “Radical Vigilante Woke Mob.”
While I’ve seen my share of them over the years and sent out a few myself, campaign fundraising emails are notorious for appealing to the hard-core base of both parties.
So, most of them are taken with a grain of salt by political observers.
However, the email I just received from the DeSantis re-election campaign really hit home. It accurately defined and summarized the aggressive domestic threat posed by the extreme Left to our nation’s very core:
Our country is currently facing a great threat. A new enemy has emerged from the shadows that seeks to destroy and intimidate their way to a transformed state, and country, that you and I would hardly recognize.
This enemy is the radical vigilante woke mob that will steamroll anything and anyone in their way. Their blatant attacks on the American way of life are clear and intensifying: stifling dissent, public shaming, rampant violence, and a perverted version of history.
A group that will, literally, tear down monuments and buildings but — perhaps in an even more sinister way — tear down the American spirit itself. They go after the family unit, parental rights, traditional moral values, the church, and fact-based education.
Over the past few years, we’ve watched horrified as this group has attempted to brainwash our children into thinking we live in an evil, racist, irredeemable country.
We listened to them deny science and data to exert political theater all the while trampling over personal liberties enshrined in the Constitution.
We saw them take to the streets for an entire summer like outlaws burning, looting, and destroying everything in sight while being told they were “mostly peaceful” and “passionate.”
DeSantis omitted the LGBTQ brainwashing of our young children and the collusion of major woke companies like Disney in doing so, but he has been at the forefront of battling both these evils in Florida.
The DeSantis campaign continues, noting something that impacted me directly on the huge social media platform LinkedIn: “We watched Big Tech moguls in Silicon Valley be the arbiters of truth – deciding who gets to speak and who gets silenced through the digital public square.”
And of course, the last piece of the massive leftist effort: “We listened to the legacy media muffle legitimately verifiable news stories that didn’t align with their preferred narrative, only to watch the truth trickle out months later at a more politically expedient time.”
Referring to himself as the “Governor of the Free State of Florida,” DeSantis then goes on to make his pitch for how he will fight this grave threat to America, at least in Florida, with “faith, with reason, and with freedom.”
And of course, he asks for our financial support.
In my view, this email accurately and effectively summarizes the threat we face from the extreme Left in America today. DeSantis is on the front lines of this battle in Florida, but he also seems to be preparing to take the fight nationally as well.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.
Facebook – a platform that routinely censors posts critical of COVID-19 vaccines – has hired several alumni from Pfizer’s marketing and internal audit teams to lead similar efforts at the social media platform, The National Pulse can reveal.
The hires appear to present a conflict of interest for the social media platform, which has come under fire for censoring and banning users who’ve posted about the side effects or questioned the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
Facebook’s Internal Audit Director, for example, was formerly a Senior Director at Pfizer. The employee – Tiffany Stokes – has held the influential position at Facebook since January 2020.
“Build and own strong relationships with critical business partners, provide project oversight of operational audits, manage internal audit plan and risk assessment,” she lists as part of her job description on her LinkedIn profile. “Leadership requires close collaboration with the Sales, Partnerships, Global Operations, International, HR, and Legal teams to assess and prioritize risks across an ever-changing high-tech business landscape,” she adds.
Prior to joining Facebook, Stokes worked at COVID-19 vaccine maker Pfizer for five years as the Senior Director of its finance and legal operations.
“Established and managed legal, budgeting, and forecasting processes to achieve the business’s financial goals as well as cost control commitments made to shareholders and the financial and investment community,” she summarized her position.
Prior to serving in this role, which she also notes required her to “adjust financial forecasts based on fluctuating costs, prioritization of legal matters, and impending legal issues,” she worked as the pharmaceutical giant’s Assistant Treasurer for the U.S. and Capital Markets, where she “directed” the company’s $8 billion investment portfolio.
The National Pulse can also reveal that a Facebook Vice President for Global Clients and Categories was formerly Pfizer’s Chief Marketing Officer for consumer healthcare in the U.S. The employee, Brian Groves, worked at Pfizer for a total of 14 years before joining Facebook as a Director of its Global Accounts.
Similarly, a former Director for Digital Marketing and Innovation at Pfizer joined Facebook as a Client Partner for its Global Marketing Solutions branch in 2018.
In addition to Facebook hiring Pfizer marketing team alumni, the platform also added Pfizer’s former Senior Public Affairs and Corporate Communications Project Manager as its own Corporate Communications Manager in 2019.
The unearthed personnel links between Pfizer and Facebook follow the social media platform deploying its third-party “fact-checkers” – who have deep ties to Democratic politics and the Chinese Communist Party – to brand COVID-19 studies and articles at odds with mainstream narrative as “disinformation.”
Australians are still suffering from the trauma of government health mandates.
In the wake of Australia’s “zero COVID” policy, which boasts 95 percent of all citizens over 16 vaccinated and some of the world’s strictest lockdowns, Scott Morrison’s government was swept out of power in May. Yet broken businesses and people’s wrecked health struggle to recover.
Some fear they may never recover.
Ask Liz Mann, who was vaccinated and says she hasn’t been the same since. Mann, 50, who works in agriculture and runs a farm in northern Victoria, wasn’t an anti-vaxxer — she had her yellow fever, Hep-A, and other shots — but decided to pass on the corona vaccine. She had COVID already, she reckons, having suffered prolonged flu-like symptoms in January 2020. So she’d have immunity. With her health history of chronic fatigue, a UK study found, she had a 27 percent chance of a “severe reaction” to Pfizer’s vaccine. On those accounts, she ought to’ve been exempt.
None of that mattered.
(Courtesy of Liz Mann)
Per Victoria’s mandate, to work, she’d have to roll up her sleeve. Delaying the inevitable, she tried working remotely from home for two weeks and took another two weeks off, but the mandates loomed. So, she caved, visited the drive-through clinic in Murchison, got the jab, and was told to park and wait 15 minutes in case of aftereffects before driving home.
Her reaction was instantaneous.
“I wound down the window feeling like I was going to black out, I honked the horn, turned around and looked at the doctor out my rear vision mirror,” she told The Epoch Times. “And then I just dropped the seat because I was about to black out.” Medical staff at the clinic checked her blood pressure and it was “160 over 100,” she said, adding that she’s “normally low blood pressure.” “I had trouble standing up at that point,” she recalled, and told how chest pains followed. “Within about three hours, it felt like I’d been kicked in the chest by a horse.”
Doctors at the clinic watched on, arms crossed over their chests, and made remarks as she lay outside. “‘Well, wonder what will happen when she has her second vaccine,’ and I said, ‘I’m not having it,’” Liz recalled. “And they had a bit of a laugh and said, ‘We’ll see about that.’ I was pretty disgusted actually.”
We contacted Murchison Medical Clinic for comment, but they were unable to respond before publishing.
(Illustrations – Boyloso/Shutterstock)
Mann’s condition showed little improvement in the days and weeks following. She remained lethargic, was bedridden for weeks on end, and was unable to perform daily tasks maintaining the farm. When a tree fell onto a fence and she had to use a chainsaw, the physical strain spurred chest pains, which extended to her face, and she had to call an ambulance. Within two weeks of the jab, other symptoms, including rashes, spontaneous bruising, and a black eye, appeared. On day 41, one side of her face drooped, and she experienced “stroke-like symptoms.”
Despite all this, Mann couldn’t get a medical exemption for her impending second jab — unlike what one would expect with side effects from other drugs like penicillin. Meanwhile, her job demanded it. She refused. They terminated her contract, but the letter they sent made no mention of vaccine stipulations.
The point was moot anyway; she couldn’t work. Her health bottomed out.
Mann did eventually get a medical exemption after eight weeks, but couldn’t work at the level she once did. Any physical activity, such as tending to her livestock, brought on pain in her chest and face, with some days being lost entirely to poor health.
Adding insult to injury, when Mann was granted a public records request, she saw her doctor had written that she had “psychological issues,” placing the blame on “anxiety.” She also found a discrepancy: Her doctors had put in a claim for two doses (was it a double?) while her immunization history showed none.
(Courtesy of Liz Mann)(Courtesy of Liz Mann)Liz Mann’s medical record request yielded doctors’ notes that she had “psychological issues.” (Courtesy of Liz Mann)
Yet Mann is lucky in some respects. With her situation, having multiple jobs and the ability to work remotely or outside Victoria, where restrictions are less strict, she can earn a living. Not everyone’s so lucky.
Nevertheless, if the election proves anything, it’s that while Australians who’ve suffered due to health mandates struggle to reclaim their lost health and livelihoods, their collective faith in the medical industry and government may be beyond repair.
“I don’t trust them anymore. I never want to see another GP in my whole life,” said Mann, adding that, even while awaiting her exemption, all the doctors wanted to do “was to put the next vaccine in [her].” It’s not exactly lucid what lies behind the curtain of absurdities. She posits it’s “very much about control.”
There were medical professionals who were forthcoming in varying degrees. Doctors admitted Mann’s adverse reactions were due to the vaccine, yet referrals to specialists were few and excuses many: “Chest pain is nothing to worry about.” A nurse did look her in the eye and prod her to speak up — even though many in society aren’t open to it.
She did just that.
“I’m not afraid to speak out. I have lost friends over this,” said Mann. “People don’t want to know about this, and it annoys me when you hear from mainstream media about stories of long COVID, but ‘vaccine side effects’ is a dirty [term] that nobody wants to hear.”
In hindsight, faced with that ultimatum again — the jab or no job — would Mann choose differently? “I would have said, ‘I don’t want the job,’ and walked away at that point and had my health,” she said. “I lost the job anyway, so it would have been the same as what happened. But I would have had my health.”
Having two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine has been linked with negative protection against symptomatic infection with the disease, scientists say, while a previous infection without vaccination offers around 50 percent immunity, according to a study analyzing the Omicron wave in Qatar.
The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine on June 15, examined the Omicron wave in Qatar that occurred from around December 2021 to February 2022, comparing vaccination rates and immunity among more than 100,000 Omicron infected and non-infected individuals.
The authors of the study found that those who had a prior infection but no vaccination had a 46.1 and 50 percent immunity against the two subvariants of the Omicron variant, even at an interval of more than 300 days since the previous infection.
However, individuals who received two doses of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine but had no previous infection, were found with negative immunity against both BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron subvariants, indicating an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 than an average person.
Over six months after getting two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, immunity against any Omicron infection dropped to -3.4 percent.
But for two doses of the Moderna vaccine, immunity against any Omicron infection dropped to -10.3 percent after more than six months since the last injection.
Though the authors reported that three doses of the Pfizer vaccine increased immunity to over 50 percent, this was measured just over 40 days after the third vaccination, which is a very short interval. In comparison, natural immunity persisted at around 50 percent when measured over 300 days after the previous infection, while immunity levels fell to negative figures 270 days after the second dose of vaccine.
These figures indicate a risk of waning immunity for the third vaccine dose as time progresses.
The findings are supported by another recent study from Israel that also found natural immunity waned significantly more slowly compared to artificial, or vaccinated, immunity.
The study found that both natural and artificial immunity waned over time.
Individuals that were previously infected but not vaccinated had half the risks of reinfection as compared to those that were vaccinated with two doses but not infected.
“Natural immunity wins again,” Dr. Martin Adel Makary, a public policy researcher at Johns Hopkins University, wrote on Twitter, referring to the Israeli study.
“Among persons who had been previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, protection against reinfection decreased as the time increased,” the authors concluded, “however, this protection was higher” than protection conferred in the same time interval through two doses of the vaccine.
Columnist Naomi Wolf, author of “The Bodies of Others: The New Authoritarians, COVID-19 and the War Against the Human,” asserts that after two years of pandemic policies, people in free societies are behaving more like those in authoritarian societies.
Wolf maintains that America is now less free, and becoming almost unrecognizable.
“A handful of bad actors” including the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Big Tech, and the World Economic Forum (WEF) used the pandemic to “exploit the crisis in such a way as to reengineer our free democratic open societies, especially in the West, especially in the United States, into a post-free society, a post-humane society,” said Wolf during a recent interview on EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders.”
The Biden administration in April extended the 2-year-old coronavirus public health emergency for another 90 days.
Wolf said, based on history, the ongoing lockdowns and extension of the public health emergency indicate society is in the last phase of a tyrannical takeover, because with emergency powers, laws protecting liberty can be suspended.
According to Wolf, there are 10 steps every tyrannical government has followed. We are now at step 10, said Wolf. Some of the other steps include demonizing whistleblowers and critics, calling dissent “treason,” “espionage,” or “subversion,” and controlling the media narrative.
During the last two years of lockdowns and mandates, Big Tech and the elites have profited while the average Americans have seen the American Dream slowly “closing” on them, she said.
“And so often, when a democracy is dying, or a regime is turning the screws on freedoms to create an established new form of tyranny, it happens intentionally in a very incremental way,” said Wolf. “And you really see this from 1930 to 1933 in Germany.”
She said humanity is witnessing the formation of a two-tier society of the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated, in which people who would never discriminate against others based on categories of race and sex are now discriminating against the unvaccinated.
“Suddenly, they’re happily embracing a discrimination society in which some people are cast as clean and valuable members of society and other people are ostracized and marginalized and ‘othered’ and described as sort of dirty and causing infection to others,” said Wolf.
She argues that big tech companies had an active role in creating these perceptions and in “shaping legislation and certainly in presenting the drama of COVID and lockdowns to us, and then the vaccine rollout, in such a way as to change human behavior and to change human society,” said Wolf.
Wolf cited the emails between Dr. Anthony Fauci and Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg discussing Facebook’s role in getting the right public health “messages out” during the lockdowns.
Mark Zuckerberg (L) and Dr. Anthony Fauci. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images; Greg Nash/Getty Images)
People had no choice but to rely on tech platforms while they were locked down, and Big Tech used that to manipulate the public, said Wolf.
“What I do trace in the book is how there was a vast profit that tech companies made by suppressing human assembly, by helping to message that it was unsafe or unlawful to gather in person,” she said. “And when you understand that big tech companies are competing with human beings gathering in human spaces, you understand why there was a vested interest in suppressing human assembly.”
Wolf thinks big tech companies will not stop at just harvesting data on the computer, but that they want to dominate peoples’ bodily autonomy with vaccine passports.
“What these companies want more than anything is to leave the parameters of your computer and to colonize other currently non-colonized spaces, notably the human body,” said Wolf.
This would give these companies and governments the ability to switch off peoples’ access to commerce, travel, and other goods and services if they did not comply with a particular mandate, Wolf added.
Some forms of digital tracking and surveilling are already here in the United States, she said.
“You’re now expected to swipe these QR codes just to see the menu, or just to get in. And the QR code uploads your data to a central database,” she said, adding that she’s seen the software “that maps the relationships of everyone sitting at that table, and then builds databases and networks of relationships.”
This illustration photo shows a person looking at the app for the New York State Excelsior Pass, which provides digital proof of a Covid-19 vaccination, in Los Angeles on April 6, 2021 (Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images)
Wolf said that on a scale of one to 10 on the Chinese social credit system, the United States is currently at a three.
“There’s a change that’s happened in American cities in the last two years,” she said.
Because most people around the world, particularly in U.S. cities, use digital apps to travel, do banking, and shop, a digital social credit system similar to China’s is imminent, she said.
Our data is being harvested and used by the “global technocratic elite” to control human behavior, said Wolf.
“We’ve assumed that the worst it can be is data are harvested from us with everything that we choose to do using our free will as human beings,” said Wolf.
“But what I’ve seen is that digital technology has its own logic, and it isn’t restricted by what human beings want to do. So once digital platforms and their oligarchical masters can figure out how to change people’s behavior to suit technology, there’s nothing, moral or ethical, that will keep them from changing people’s behavior to suit their technology, and to suit their business plans,” she added.
The pandemic has revealed how this type of digital control is playing out, because humans, before the prevalence of digital technology, did not choose to “socially distance” to fight pandemics, said Wolf.
“The dream of our digital overlords is for technology to tell humans what to do, and that’s exactly where we’re at,” said Wolf.
While some people might label her a conspiracy theorist, her opinions are based on a long career as a journalist, political consultant, and now tech CEO, Wolf said. Furthermore, she has witnessed firsthand the powerful elites making historical decisions under the radar, she said.
Wolf was well acquainted with this group of powerful people until recently when she was ejected from their circles for writing oppositional pieces on lockdowns.
“But it’s really true that the global technocratic elite have more in common with each other than they do with their fellow Germans or Americans or Russians or Chinese, and they now are able to align above the level of nation-states,” she said.
The panel ‘Leaders for Europe’s Digital Decade’ at the 2022 World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on May 25, 2022. The yearly meeting takes place from May 22 to 26 with heads of governments and economic leaders. (Eric Lalmand/AFP via Getty Images)
For example, one of the WEF’s goals is to make nation-level decision-making less and less important, and the World Health Organization’s goal is to make public health decisions on a global scale, bypassing countries’ own authorities via the pandemic treaty, said Wolf.
“These technocratic elites really do believe that they can order the world better than you and I and that they have the right to,” she said. “That’s really scary.”
Little by little, humanity’s tolerance for cruelty and authoritarianism has grown.
“The war wasn’t just on us as a political entity, the war was on American culture, and is on American culture,” she said. “And they’ve succeeded largely, unless we wake up, because we were a kind, decent, inclusive culture that respected other people’s boundaries and freedoms. … And now a CCP-style cruelty is something that we tolerate.”
What people believe is largely determined by the news they consume, said Wolf, and many people only watch news outlets that give a skewed picture of pandemic treatments and policies, largely funded by wealthy people like Bill Gates.
“I do trace in ‘The Bodies of Others’ how millions of dollars flowed and are flowing from entities like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the BBC and the Guardian and NPR and other formerly very credible, objective news outlets.”
Because most people get slanted news coverage, the country is more divided and many people on the left refuse to consider any other narrative or look at primary source documents, because they believe only government sources are giving them “scientific” information, said Wolf.
This skewed messaging has been able to convince people that the mandates and lockdowns are more American and important than liberty or critical thinking.
Wolf said the most brilliant aspect of the pandemic messaging was that it was framed altruistically.
“You know, ‘You’ve got to exclude those people for the good of the community,’ or ‘You’ve got to mask yourself and your child to save your child,’” said Wolf. “This really brilliantly upended American culture because it cast freedom as selfish.”
Now that those in power have effectively conditioned people to be fearful and submissive, they can keep reinstituting emergency powers, she argued.
“That’s what emergency law means,” she said. “They can do whatever they want, basically. It’s a weaponization of boards of health, it’s a weaponization of the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and the [Department of Health and Human Services].”
Wolf said although the situation is dire, people can do something to push back against this tyranny by being informed about what is really going on in the country, assembling in groups, and getting involved politically on the local level.
As it stands now, “I will say that each side is being fed narratives and stereotypes about the other that would persuade each side that the other is absolutely insane and dangerous, dangerously insane,” said Wolf.
“I get that conservatives think, ‘liberals don’t know what a woman is.’ That is not actually literally true, and liberals think ‘conservatives all want to torch our democratic processes, storm the Capitol, and are misogynist, racist thugs who are trigger happy,” said Wolf.
The last two years have conditioned people to fear each other and so the conversations that would have normally occurred when people gathered are not happening and keeping the country divided, said Wolf. She said she will gladly talk to people on the right.
Communist Party cadres hang a placard on the neck of a Chinese man during the Cultural Revolution in 1966. The words on the placard state the man’s name and accuse him of being a member of the “black class.” (Public Domain)
“People I love think I’m doing something wrong in even talking to conservatives and libertarians. That’s very dangerous. The left, especially, has decided that you’re morally complicit if you have a conversation across the aisle,” Wolf said. “That is censorship, that is cancel culture, that’s un-American, that is an importation from Communism.”
She urges people to remember what makes America unique and a beacon to other nations: to remember we are the great experiment where neighbors talked to each other, listened, and didn’t “rat” each other out if they did not agree with each other, Wolf said.
Florida governor Ron DeSantis (R.) said the White House and media outlets lied about Florida’s health policies when they claimed he “reversed course” by permitting health care providers to order COVID-19 vaccines for children under the age of five.
“Not surprised the White House would lie, definitely not surprised that legacy media would amplify the lie because that’s what they do,” DeSantis said during a Monday news conference.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Friday said that after “repeated failures” to order vaccines, DeSantis “reversed course” and decided to allow health care providers to order the shots for children between six months old and five. But Florida surgeon general Dr. Joseph Ladapo said the state has always allowed providers to place orders for vaccines. DeSantis said Thursday that Florida discourages COVID vaccination for young children and would not place orders for the vaccine to be distributed to them, but the state would not block providers from acquiring it themselves.
“Doctors can get it. Hospitals can get it. But there’s not going to be any state programs that are going to be trying to get COVID jabs to infants and toddlers and newborns,” DeSantis said. “That’s not where we’re going to be utilizing our resources.”
Florida is the only state in the country that did not place advance orders for the pediatric vaccines, a position media outlets including Forbes, CBS News, and McClatchy DC claimed DeSantis reversed after Jean-Pierre’s comments on Friday. DeSantis’s approach to infant vaccination mirrors that of Scandinavian countries including Sweden, which decided not to recommend vaccinating children under 11 due to the “low risk for serious disease for kids,” and Denmark and Norway, which do not offer vaccines to children under five.
The Food and Drug Administration approved Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna’s vaccines for children five and younger on Friday, but only 18 percent of parents are eager for their child under five to receive the vaccine, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll showed. Less than a third of children ages 5-11 have received the vaccine since it became available to them in November.
A White House official made a false claim on June 20 about COVID-19 vaccines while encouraging parents to get their young children vaccinated.
Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House’s COVID-19 response coordinator, said that “there have not been any serious side effects of these vaccines.”
Contrary to Jha’s claim, severe allergic reactions, blood clotting, heart inflammation, and paralysis are among the serious side effects linked to the three COVID-19 vaccines that are available in the United States.
“There is a well-documented risk of myocarditis from the COVID vaccine, especially in young men and adolescent boys, and an elevated risk of clotting in young women with the Moderna vaccine,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, told The Epoch Times in an email.
“It’s not right for government scientific advisers to downplay documented risks of the vaccine because it ultimately undermines confidence in public health.”
White House officials didn’t return a request for comment.
Jha, who recently took a post with the Biden administration and is on a break from being dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, was on a media tour on June 20 promoting COVID-19 vaccination for children younger than 5.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines for young children last week, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that virtually every child who’s now eligible get one of the vaccines.
Jha said the steps happened because the data on the vaccines were “quite compellingly clear” and that the vaccines were both safe and effective, even though major questions have arisen about their safety and efficacy.
“It’s really reassuring to know that for young kids, these vaccines are exceedingly safe,” Jha said.
Children in Moderna’s trial were more likely to suffer a severe adverse event after vaccination than after getting a placebo, while more vaccinated volunteers in Pfizer’s trial experienced severe COVID-19 cases when compared to the placebo group.
“The phrase ‘safe and effective’ has become meaningless and can no longer be trusted. It has been hijacked by commercial interests. A more accurate phrase would be ‘buyer beware,’” Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who started a group called Woody Matters, told The Epoch Times in a recent email after reviewing the data from the trials.
Jha also said the vaccines “are doing an extraordinary job at keeping kids out of the hospital.” While that appears to have been the case earlier in the COVID-19 pandemic, it may not be now, according to data presented during meetings with the government’s vaccine advisory panels last week.
For example, effectiveness against hospitalization was just 22 percent after 60 days among 12- to 15-year-olds who received Pfizer’s vaccine, according to data from the CDC’s VISION network.
Other studies indicate higher effectiveness, but it’s unclear whether the vaccines are doing an “extraordinary job.” There’s also no clinical evidence that the vaccines will shield against severe COVID-19 cases in young children.
Jha was speaking on CBS and ABC.
All of the experts who advise the government voted in support of the vaccines. But some said parents should know key details, including how the safety and efficacy data were based on small numbers of children.
“I think it’s the right decision today to make these vaccines available for this age group, but I also think it’s important that people understand it’s a small number of children who have received these vaccines, and the safety is not as well established as it is in adolescents and adults,” Dr. Cody Meissner, who advises the FDA on vaccines, said during one of the meetings. “So it’s important to continue to follow the safety profile of these vaccines. I don’t think they should be required for any specific situation.”
On the other hand, others said they think parents should get their children vaccinated, regardless of the child’s health.
“My personal hope [is] that every child in the U.S. seeks and gets vaccinated in the near future,” said Dr. Michael Nelson, another adviser.
Fox Business host Larry Kudlow didn’t hold back on a recent segment of his show and told his audience the full extent of the Biden Administration’s failing economic policies.
In part of the segment, Kudlow gives an insight into the latest Fox News poll numbers which show waning confidence in the President’s ability to lead an economic recovery.
He also refuted a common talking point the left often uses about wealthy individuals and major corporations not paying their fair share of taxes.
Notably, Kudlow actually agreed on a few observations recently made by resident Biden about issues plaguing the nation – before highlighting the fact that Biden’s own policies have led to the problems he wants to solve.
Eight months after his 19-year-old daughter Grace died in a hospital after having been given a combination of a sedative, an anxiety medication, and morphine, Scott Schara and his family continue to bring attention to why they think she died, and who’s responsible.
Their most recent billboard campaign targets St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in Appleton, Wisconsin, where his daughter with Down’s syndrome passed.
Hospital staff driving to and from work would have a hard time not seeing the billboards that ask, “Was Grace given a lethal combination of meds at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital? Intentional? … Who’s Next?”
Others ask, “Was Grace labeled Do Not Resuscitate without family consent at St. E’s?”
Grace died in October 2021, a month after COVID-19 vaccine mandates had been announced by resident Joe Biden.
People who didn’t want to take the experimental vaccine were being fired, while unvaccinated patients in hospitals were being treated much differently than the vaccinated.
Reports from people such as Anne Quiner in Minnesota painted a picture of medical discrimination and unusual hospital protocols that many, like Quiner, alleged led to the death of their loved ones.
According to Schara, Grace, who, like the rest of her family, was unvaccinated, was admitted to St. Elizabeth’s for COVID-19 respiratory issues on Oct. 6 but had been recovering when the doctor began giving her a sedative called Precedex.
Schara said there were frequent incidents of discrimination regarding Grace’s unvaccinated status, and their choice to use other early treatment medications that weren’t approved by Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Grace was on Precedex for four days preceding her last day, Schara told The Epoch Times, despite severe risks associated with being on the drug for longer than 24 hours.
On Oct. 13, the day Grace died, she was given—in addition to the Precedex—Lorazepam, and morphine within a 29-minute window, Schara said, even though the package insert for morphine warns against using it in combination with the other two drugs because it can result in death.
With an armed guard standing near the doorway of her room at the hospital, Schara said Grace’s sister and patient advocate begged nurses she saw in the hallway to revive Grace as their parents watched from Facetime, joining her in their pleas.
There was nothing to be done, a nurse responded because Grace had been coded as Do Not Resuscitate (DNR), a label that Scott said must be legally approved and signed off on by the medical power of attorney, who was Grace’s mother, Cindy.
The family said this never happened.
“Why would we agree to a DNR when we would not only want the doctors to save our daughter at any cost but also the morning of Grace’s last day, the doctor recommended a feeding tube to start the process of getting Grace home?” he asked.
The doctor had told the family, Schara said, that Grace “had a good day yesterday; we should work on nutrition,” before recommending a feeding tube.
Medical records seen by The Epoch Times show that the DNR order was put into the system eight minutes after a maximum dose of Precedex was administered at 10:48 a.m., on Grace’s last day, which Schara calls the “smoking gun.”
“She had been on Precedex for four days at this point, then they gave her close to the maximum dose,” he said. “Eight minutes later, the doctor puts the illegal DNR on her.”
According to her death certificate, Grace died of acute respiratory failure with hypoxemia.
Schara said “respiratory failure” is a direct side effect of using Precedex for more than 24 hours.
“Of course, COVID-19 pneumonia is listed as the second cause of death in order for the hospital to receive the killing bonus from the government,” he said.
The Schara family’s billboard campaign, 2022. (Courtesy of Scott Schara)
‘We Are in a Spiritual Battle’
Since then, Schara said he has continued investigating and has found even more negligence.
To bring attention to what happened, he’s been on over 100 media outlets, and has even held a rally with city approval outside of the hospital, he said.
Schara said the family has committed over $300,000 to the campaigns, $225,454 of that is for the billboards they put up through May 2023.
“Money is temporary,” Schara said. “I don’t want this to happen to anyone else. We are in a spiritual battle, and people must realize that.”
After telling his story to a wider audience, Robin Riley from Newtown, Connecticut, reached out to Schara on Grace’s website to share her own experience.
Riley’s and Schara’s stories share many similarities. Riley told The Epoch Times that her daughter with Down’s syndrome, 37-year-old Megan, was admitted to a hospital for COVID-19 and put on numerous tranquilizers and Fentanyl, as well as remdesivir.
Megan was also labeled as DNR, which Riley said she had never approved, and didn’t know until she got Megan’s records.
Megan died on Dec. 9, 2021, Riley said.
After discovering that the hospital had put Megan on DNR, Riley said it made her grief worse.
“Because they had her on DNR the whole time, I just keep thinking, did the doctors do everything they could to save her?” she asked.
Megan Riley, 2021. (Courtesy of Robin Riley)
‘There Was No Reason to Sedate Her’
For Schara, none of this is a coincidence, he said.
For the combination of meds given to Grace, the doctor had to order, a pharmacist had to sign off, the hospital medication alarm had to be overridden, and in Grace’s case, a 14-year ICU nurse delivered the lethal combination, Schara said.
“We were not provided informed consent about the drugs administered to Grace, nor did we know they were being administered in the first place,” Schara said. “There was no reason to sedate her. There was no reason to give her Lorazepam–an anti-anxiety drug–while she was knocked out from Precedex. There was no reason to give her morphine. The Nuremberg Code was created to ensure people would have informed consent in regard to any medical procedure, and to be able to opt out of such things. St. Elizabeth’s ignored providing informed consent and they ignored all the warnings in the package inserts.”
Schara first thought the hospital protocols leading up to her death were about the hospital getting federal reimbursements; however, now he suspects a motive much worse: hospitals are taking federal funding to enact COVID protocols that were not only killing the unvaccinated but the disabled, he said.
He cited one 2020 study from the UK Office for National Statistics that show that disabled people had made up about three-fifths of COVID-related deaths in England and Wales.
“Disabled females between nine and 64 were even more at risk, in comparison with non-disabled females in the same age group, with a rate of death 10.8 times higher,” he said.
He cited a 2021 report from the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy that stated that intellectual disability is second to old age as a risk factor for COVID-19 deaths.
“In unadjusted analysis, compared with 431,669 patients without intellectual disabilities, the 127,003 patients with intellectual disabilities were more suspectable to hospitalization, intensive care admission, and death,” he said.
He’s collected several additional studies and articles that support the theory that the disabled are at higher risk.
Combining that with his own experience, he thinks the disabled with COVID-19 are purposely being murdered.
He points to an article from NPR that tells the story of Melissa Hickson, who claimed a hospital where her quadriplegic husband was admitted for COVID-19 denied him life-saving treatment because of his disability.
The Milgram Experiment
All these reports and studies connect for Schara, implying ominous motives funded not only by money, but blind obedience, he said, alluding to a set of experiments in the 1960s that tested how far a person would go to follow orders.
“In the Milgram experiments, these psychologists tested the willingness of the participants in how far they would go to administer electric shock treatment to their peers under orders from an authority figure,” Schara said.
The experiments were held at Yale University by Stanley Milgram three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann.
Milgram’s intent of the experiments was to study the psychology of genocide, he explained in his reports.
‘Death Protocols’
Todd Callender, an international lawyer with Disabled Rights Advocates and legal counsel to Truth for Health Foundation, previously told The Epoch Times that the “death protocols” being enacted in hospitals are passed down hierarchically from the World Health Organization to the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute of Health, using the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act and Health and Human Services authorization to release funding for the declared pandemic that sets the protocols in motion.
From there, hospitals that are federally funded through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) use coding tied to NIH and CDC-written protocols. If those hospitals take that funding, they must follow those protocols, starting with ICD-10 codes (International Classification of Diseases).
According to Callender, the CDC and NIH protocols are based on the WHO’s 2005 International Health Regulations which directs each of its 196 signatory countries to cede all sovereign powers to the WHO in the case of a declared health emergency.
“The WHO then directs the various state health bodies—in this case, the CDC and NIH—on treatment,” Callender said. “This is why every country is responding in the same way at the same time globally; it’s a back door to a one-world dictatorial government.”
When these protocols are passed down to the hospitals that take funding, under the emergency declaration, patients’ rights are waived under the CMS COVID waiver program in conjunction with the PREP and CARES Act, giving participating hospitals legal immunity.
Patients admitted for a broken arm can be given a COVID-19 test that “will almost always come back positive,” then are admitted and put on an IV with a tranquilizer that lowers oxygen levels, which then justifies putting the patient into COVID isolation where the antiviral drug remdesivir—which Callender called “lethal”—is added to the bag before being moved into the intensive care unit where the patient is then given morphine and fentanyl while being deprived of nutrition, he said.
“Everybody talks about their fear of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) death camps,” Callender said. “Well, they’re already here; they’re called hospitals.”
Each of these procedures brings in high federal reimbursements of up to hundreds of thousands of dollars, Callender said.
Tom Renz, an attorney with America’s Frontline Doctors and Make Americans Free Again—organizations that oppose unconstitutional federal health mandates—hosts his own show on Brighteon TV where he interviewed Schara.
He told The Epoch Times that, because the PREP and CARES Acts have been passed, it’s made it impossible to sue hospitals because they convey immunity to these hospitals.
“Through those acts, we’ve given hospitals as much immunity as we’ve given vaccine makers as long as the state of emergency is continuing,” he said. “And we’ve got to ask ourselves, why is there still a national emergency?”
In addition to immunity, hospitals get federal funding through the CARES Act, which gives a 20 percent increase in reimbursement to hospitals for inpatient stays resulting from COVID-19, Renz said.
“The laws are structured in a way that incentivizes hospitals to kill people,” Renz said. “The hospital makes more money if you die from COVID-19 than if you recover from it. Why don’t we incentivize hospitals for getting people cured of COVID?”
Renz supports Schara’s conclusion that the hospital killed Grace, he said.
“Can you imagine watching your daughter die on Facetime, begging the hospital to revive her, and they say, ‘No, we are not going to do that,’ claiming that they have a DNR that you didn’t agree to?” he asked. “I mean, can you imagine the horror? No person should have to go through that, and we’ve got to have accountability.”
Like Schara’s response from the hospital, Riley said the hospital contended that the family agreed to the DNR.
In a Dec. 15 letter to the Schara family, the hospital said that “multiple and in-depth discussions and explanations occurred with you, your wife and family in regards to resuscitation and intubation. The medical record documentation on October 13, 2021, reflects additional discussion and confirmation of the family decisions related to resuscitation and intubation interventions should Grace’s condition deteriorate.”
“What a bunch of crap,” Schara said, reemphasizing that his family never agreed to a DNR.
“The doctors only discussed the concept of DNR,” Schara said. “Why would we agree to a DNR when he just got done telling us that Grace had such a good day yesterday that we should work on nutrition?”
St. Elizabeth’s Hospital did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.
‘Genocide’
There’s a pattern, Schara said, that he hasn’t been able to ignore.
“If I would have listened to me saying these words now seven months ago, I would have thought, at best he’s become a conspiracy theorist; at worst: a whack job,” he said.
However, too many incidences of negligence have lined up to be a coincidence, he said.
“At first I thought this was about money, but it’s clear to me now that money was used to simply grease the wheels to accomplish a bigger agenda, which, in my opinion, is genocide,” he said.
AFTER YEARS OF HIDING IT, THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IS APPARENTLY ADMITTING THE TRUTH BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
The director of the World Health Organization privately believes the COVID-19 pandemic resulted from a leak from a Chinese laboratory, according to a new report which undermines the publicly stated position of the global health chief.
Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus – the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) – had previously stressed how unlikely the long-derided “lab leak” theory was, despite evidence to the contrary. Now, according to a report from the Daily Mail, Dr. Tedros “confided to a senior European politician that the most likely explanation was a catastrophic accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.”
The quiet admission in support of the “lab leak” theory is especially at odds with the public position of his WHO, whose affiliated scientists have often branded the hypothesis as a “conspiracy theory” and sought to silence the voices of those who claims otherwise.
BOMBSHELL REPORT BY THE MAIL.
The admission also follows the WHO launching a COVID-19 origins investigation that ultimately discredited the “lab leak” theory in favor of a “natural origins” theory. At the time, The National Pulse exclusively revealed that several researchers included on the team retained compromising links to the Chinese Communist Party, most notably EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak. Advisors to the Chinese Communist Party also served on the team.
Daszak and his partners conducted research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology using funds from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci. Using this million-dollar grant, the lab has worked on isolating bat coronavirus strains capable of “direct human infection” and is under the control of the Chinese Communist Party.
The lab also appears to have engaged in gain-of-function research, which manipulates pathogens to become more lethal and transmissible to humans. The lab has done similar research on other viruses including influenza and monkeypox.
The WHO sponsored a second COVID-19 origins investigation following its botched first attempt, leading Dr. Tedros to publicly admit that “we do not yet have the answers as to where it came from or how it entered the human population” this month.
Tedros himself has ties to the Chinese Communist Party, helping the regime expand its financial and political control over his home country of Ethiopia while serving in government.
Former U.S. President Donald J. Trump attempted to shift away from relying on Tedros, the World Health Organization, and even Anthony Fauci. He was widely ridiculed and maligned at the time, despite the mounting evidence that most of the above actors are now either totally discredited, or have rowed back from their original COVID-19 claims.
Four key House Republicans are questioning a $500 million earmark sought by resident Joe Biden for an international group headquartered in Oslo, Norway, and led in the United States by political appointees of former President Barack Obama.
The $500 million would go to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation (CEPI), a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), which was formed in 2017 by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome, and the World Economic Forum (WEF), according to the group’s website.
The website claims that “CEPI’s early coronavirus investments combined with its global focus, multi-sectoral partnerships, and ability to move quickly resulted in 20+ vaccines against COVID-19 and its variants.” The website also quotes Microsoft founder Bill Gates as crediting CEPI with helping “develop COVID-19 vaccines in less than a year.”
It’s not clear how CEPI can claim credit for vaccines that were prompted and overseen by the Operation Warp Speed program initiated at the outset of the virus in the United States by then-President Donald Trump in 2020.
Shortly after leaving the Obama administration, Dawn O’Connell, former Counsel at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Obama, became CEPI’s Washington, D.C. Executive Director, according to the House GOPers in a June 16 letter. O’Connell is now back at HHS as Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), a position in which she could be helpful to CEPI.
The signers are Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.), the Ranking Member of the House Administration Committee, Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), the Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.), and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), the Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
All four of the GOP signers could become chairs of their respective committees if Republicans retake the House majority in the November congressional elections. Their letter was addressed to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Shalanda Young, and Samantha Power, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Acting Administrator.
“President Biden’s FY23 budget calls for a specific allocation to CEPI through no evident bidding process. In addition to the creation of a $4.5 billion Global Health Security and Pandemic Preparedness Fund to contract with international health organizations, the budget request includes a separate $500 million line item for CEPI,” the GOP letter signers wrote.
“This $500 million request for CEPI is significantly larger than the federal government’s previous five-year distribution of $20 million, making the United States the single largest contributor to CEPI,” the letter continued.
“The lack of transparency and justification for this funding increase raises concerns. Furthermore, CEPI’s close ties to the Obama-Biden and Biden-Harris Administrations, suggest a revolving door of politically-connected personnel where Administration friends are rewarded with federal dollars,” the letter said.
In addition to moving from HHS to CEPI and then back to HHS, O’Connell, during her four years running the NGO’s Washington office, “lobbied the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in ‘support of appropriations from USAID to CEPI… [and an] Unsolicited Proposal Concept Note… for possible cooperative agreement funding relationship,’” according to the letter, citing federal lobbying records.
The letter further notes that O’Connell has never registered as a foreign lobbyist and that “CEPI’s current Director of the U.S. office is Dr. Nicole Lurie, who served as ASPR under the Obama Administration.”
A spokesman for CEPI did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment. A spokesman for O’Connell did not reply after asking The Epoch Times for written questions and being given these queries:
Why did she not register as a foreign agent during her tenure in CEPI’s Washington, D.C. office as required by the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) statute, given her employment and lobbying activities targeting USAID?
Has she recused herself as ASPR from any decision-making process, both formally and informally, at HHS that potentially could result in federal dollars or other resources being directed to CEPI?
With whom at OMB or elsewhere in the White House has she discussed the proposed $500 million grant to CEPI prior to today?
The four GOP letter signers want to know how the Biden administration can justify a 2,400 percent increase in funding from the federal government’s current $20 million annual contribution to CEPI.
The signers also want to know if any other NGOs were invited to be considered as alternative grant recipients and which federal agencies, offices and individuals were consulted about CEPI during development of the $500 million grant proposal.
In addition, the signers want to know why has “no lobbyist for CEPI ever registered under [FARA], given the primary beneficiaries of such a large infusion of taxpayer dollars will be the foreign governments funding the group’s operations?”
On its website, CEPI describes the CCP Virus that is also known as the COVID-19 as the main reason for its formation for the development and implementation of the NGO’s proposal of a plan it claims can eliminate the prospect of any similar pandemics in the future.
“As COVID-19 has so amply demonstrated, emerging infectious diseases represent an existential threat to our way of life. It was not the first and, unless we take dramatic action, will not be the last pandemic of the 21st century,” according to the CEPI website.
“But unlike some of the other big threats that humanity faces, we have the tools to substantially reduce and even to eliminate the risk of future pandemics. A decade ago such an ambition would have seemed utopian; now, having compressed a decade of technology development into less than 12 months, it is well within our grasp—if we take action,” according to the site.
The site claims that “CEPI has secured financial support from Australia, Austria, Belgium, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Canada, Denmark, the European Commission, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Singapore, Switzerland, The Republic of Korea, United Kingdom, USAID, and Wellcome.”
“Severely flawed” is a cardiologist’s verdict on a peer-reviewed study funded by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suggesting possible risks of developing myocarditis and pericarditis after getting a COVID-19 vaccine.
The recent FDA study published on June 11, 2022, used health insurance databases to identify myocarditis or pericarditis hospitalizations occurring in people aged 18 to 64 years, 1 to 7 days after a Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.
The authors found that though only 12 to 14 percent of the studied cohort were 18- to 25-year-olds, 33 to 42 percent of the myocarditis or pericarditis events occurred in people of this age group, suggesting that this age group may be linked with these vaccine adverse events.
“These results do not indicate a statistically significant risk difference between mRNA-1273 (the Moderna vaccine) and BNT162b2 (the Pfizer vaccine), but it should not be ruled out that a difference might exist,” the authors wrote in the study.
However, cardiologist Dr. Sanjay Verma told The Epoch Times that the study “using a 7-day limit for clinical endpoints” for myocarditis or pericarditis events after vaccination was “severely flawed.”
Explaining that spike proteins have been found in blood circulation even four months after injection, “there is no medical justification for a 7- or 21-day cutoff,” he said.
Verma pointed out further issues in the study, stating that it does not include 12- to 17-year-olds, “who are the highest risk cohort.”
The same CDC MMWR report also found that the 12- to 17-year-old cohort has “2 to 3 times increased incidence compared to the 18- to 29-year-old cohort,” the doctor explained.
After the second dose, males aged 12 to 17 years had an incidence of 22.0 to 35.9 myocarditis or pericarditis cases out of 100,000 as compared to males aged 18 to 29 years who had an incidence of 6.5 to 15 cases out of 100,000, demonstrating that teens have a higher risk than adults.
Verma also added that “the study does not account for those who may have died before hospitalization,” who would not be “included in insurance claims database.”
Nonetheless, the cardiologist noted a “tremendous improvement” in the study for using health insurance databases as compared to prior FDA studies that exclusively relied on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which would most likely result in a lower incidence of cases.
“Overall, the findings of the study are interesting, but the above limitations likely yield significant underestimation of the true risk of myocarditis or pericarditis after COVID vaccination.”
“Public safety and ethical post market pharmacovigilance warrants more robust active longitudinal follow-up to ensure informed consent and appropriate risk stratification counseling,” Verma concluded.
‘China is the drug he just can’t quit’: GOP Senator slams NIAD head’s remarks
Dr. Anthony Fauci said he was unable to commit to stop federal funding from going to Chinese scientific research, despite the U.S. intelligence community assessing the regime as America’s top adversary.
Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), made the remarks while appearing virtually at the Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee hearing on June 16, during an exchange with Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas).
“The NIH is still funding research in China, at least $8 million since 2020. In the Intelligence Community’s 2022 Annual Threat Assessment, the Chinese Communist Party is presented as one of the top threats to the United States, along with Russia, Iran, Syria, and North Korea. To my knowledge, only China is receiving U.S. research dollars,” said the senator during the hearing. “When will you as director of NIAID stop funding research in China?”
Since 2020, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has awarded a total of $8.3 million in grants to the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention and its division National Center for AIDS/STD Control and Prevention, along with five top public universities in mainland China and Hong Kong, according to the NIH website.
Although this amount doesn’t capture dollars later funneled to a Chinese institution through a U.S.-based organization, such as New York-based EcoHealth Alliance, which had partnered with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to perform coronavirus-related experiments that some experts said fit the definition of gain-of-function research, that is, experiments that increase the pathogenicity or transmissibility of a virus.
Fauci, in response to Marshall’s question, said that the U.S. federal agencies “had very productive peer-reviewed highly regarded research projects with our Chinese colleagues that have led to some major advances in biomedical research.”
“So I don’t think I’d be able to tell you that we are going to stop funding Chinese,” Fauci said.
“We obviously need to be careful and make sure that when we do fund them we have the proper peer review and we go through all the established guidelines,” he continued, adding that “grants that go to foreign countries, including China, have State Department clearance.”
“Dr. Fauci’s remarks prove that China is the drug he just can’t quit,” Marshall later told The Epoch Times about the NIAID head’s response.
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) questions Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, at a Senate panel on June 16, 2022. (The Epoch Times via the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee)
“Dr. Fauci told the truth for once after years of repeated dishonesty that has eroded Americans’ trust in our public health institutions. In the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic, our government should know it’s dangerous and wrong to continue funding research projects supported by the Chinese Communist Party.”
The senator, at the hearing, followed up by asking Fauci if he agrees that the American public lacks records and studies from EcoHealth Alliance’s research.
Fauci’s answer was evasive.
“We have access to an extraordinary amount of information that has gone there,” he said, arguing that the publicly available information in the scientific journals is sufficient.
“Obviously none of us know everything that’s going on in China but if the question at hand is the rather small … peer-reviewed high-priority grant that was given from Eco[Health] to China in a sub-award we have a lot of good information that’s in the publishing.”
The NIH gave a total of $3.1 million grant to EcoHealth over the five years from 2014 to 2019. A fifth of that, $599,000, went to the Wuhan lab, in part for identifying and altering bat coronaviruses deemed likely to infect humans, documents obtained by The Intercept show.
Fauci earlier this week tested positive for COVID-19 and joined the Thursday Senate hearing remotely. His response to Marshall omitted reference EcoHealth’s lack of disclosure over some of its research activities, which would have prompted an NIH review over biosafety measures.
In this image from video, Dr. Anthony Fauci testifies to a Senate panel via remotelink on June 16, 2022. (The Epoch Times via the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee)
In one experiment at the Wuhan facility, funded by NIH via EcoHealth, mice infected with a modified version of the original bat coronavirus “became sicker than those infected” with the original version, an “unexpected result” that was not “something that the researchers set out to do,” Lawrence Tabak, the principal deputy director at the NIH, told lawmakers last October.
He said EcoHealth had violated grant terms by failing to promptly notify the NIH about the finding.
Fauci, at the Thursday hearing, also told Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) that he believes the outbreak of the virus “is very, very likely a jump in species from an animal host,” and less likely to be the result of a lab leak.
“I believe it’s essential to have cooperation and collaboration with the Chinese,” he said when Braun asked him whether he thinks Beijing will cooperate with him to “get to the thorough bottom of” COVID-19 origins.
An Obama-appointed federal judge in New York who owns between $50,000 and $100,000 worth of Pfizer stock has recused herself to avoid the possible appearance of bias or prejudice since she was overseeing a case of NYC teachers trying to get exemptions to the COVID vaccines.
Recusal, in legal terms, means that a judge excuses him or herself because of a potential conflict of interest.
Valerie Caproni is a United States District Court for the Southern District of New York who was overseeing two cases that could potentially have a conflict of interest.
“Plaintiffs argue that the Undersigned’s ownership of stock in Pfizer Inc. ‘constitutes a direct financial conflict of interest in the outcome of this case,’” reads the order granting recusal (pdf) of Caproni—the first judge—which was filed on June 11.
Att. Sujata Gibson, who represents one of the lawsuits, Kane et al. v. de Blasio, told The Epoch Times: “Federal law prohibits federal judges from taking part in a case in which they have any financial interest, no matter how small. Pfizer stocks have been impacted by court injunctions against COVID vaccine mandates, and ownership of this stock, therefore, constitutes a conflict of interest. We are glad that Judge Caproni is stepping down after improperly overseeing this case for eight months.”
The second appointed judge also stepped down for similar reasons.
On the morning of June 14, plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify Judge Edgardo Ramos, who was initially assigned and has agreed to step down due to his investments in Pfizer and other COVID vaccine stocks.
According to a Wall Street Journal article, Edgardo Ramos and other 130 federal judges broke the law by overseeing court cases where they or their families owned stock in the company or companies involved.
According to the outlet, Ramos handled a lawsuit between TIG Insurance Co. and Exxon Mobil Corp. unit related to pollution allegations while owning up to $50,000 of Exxon stock.
A third judge, who also appeared to own Pfizer and J&J stocks, was asked to step down but denied the request.
“Application denied. The application is based on outdated information,” Judge Naomi Buchwald responded on June 14.
Gibson’s team requested updated financial disclosures.
“The court has now twice reassigned the case to other members of the judiciary with even worse financial conflicts of interest,” Gibson said. “We were alerted that the case was reassigned to the Hon. Naomi Reice Buchwald, who owned up to a quarter of a million dollars in Pfizer stock, and up to $100,000 in Johnson and Johnson stock as of 2020. We have three times now asked that the Court appoint a judge without financial conflicts of interest.”
Michael Kane speaks outside the Australian Consulate to protesters supporting people locked up in Australia for being unvaccinated, Manhattan, New York, on Dec 4, 2021 (Enrico Trigoso/The Epoch Times)
Children’s Health Defense, a non-profit organization founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is sponsoring the two cases in NYC, representing workers that were fired for rejecting the jabs.
On Nov. 13, 2021, some NYC teachers were granted a right to reapply for their religious exemptions, overturning Caproni’s original denial of relief.
Main plaintiff Michael Kane told The Epoch Times: “Judge Caproni presided over my case for more than 8 months knowing the entire time she had a conflict of interest in owning Pfizer stock. I can’t help but think of all the teachers and New Yorkers who are now on welfare, losing their homes, can barely feed their children, and wonder if it would have been different for them if only we had an impartial judge before us.”
In March, NYC Mayor Eric Adams granted vaccination exemption for the city’s athletes and performers and later denied accusations of being lobbied by economic groups to nullify the requirement.
“What our economic team has been doing is stating, ‘How do we turn around our economy?’” Adams said during an appearance on FOX5 in March.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams gives a speech at Kings Theatre, in the Flatbush neighborhood of the Brooklyn borough in New York on April 26, 2022. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
“That’s why we did the outside dining, that’s why we lifted the determination of must-have the vaccine inside the restaurants. We listen to people and stated we’re going to do this at the right time so that we can turn around our economy and make sure we don’t do it [in a way] that’s going to impact our health,” Adams said.
However, Adams admitted that ex-City Council Speaker Corey Johnson lobbied him on behalf of the Brooklyn Nets prior to granting exemptions to local athletes from New York’s vaccine mandates.
“Corey reached out, clearly stated he was speaking on behalf of the Nets when he reached out,” Adams said. “I received calls from people who were against and for—that happens in this city. I said, ‘Corey, like any other person, I’m going based on what my doctors stated.’”
In the public record of the contract, it shows that the lobbying is targeting three city officials: Eric Adams, Frank Carone, Adams’s counselor, and his chief legal adviser Brendan McGuire.
Screenshot of a table from the New York Office of The City Clerk. (Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
The Epoch Times reached out to Caproni’s office for comment.
A California doctor has been sentenced to two months in prison for being involved in the Jan. 6 breach of the Capitol and stepping inside the restricted premises along with her co-defendant John Strand.
Dr. Simone Melissa Gold was initially charged with entering a restricted building or grounds, violent entry, and disorderly conduct, and arrested on Jan. 18, 2021. She spent two days in custody. On March 3, 2022, she pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor charge of illegally entering the restricted building. Gold was sentenced June 16 to serve 60 days in jail, one year of supervised release, pay a $9,500 fine, and $500 restitution.
Gold is the founder of America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS), a nonprofit that has spoken out against the emergency use authorization of COVID-19 vaccines and promoted the use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine during the initial days of the pandemic.
While inside the building, Gold delivered a speech through a megaphone to a crowd gathered in Statuary Hall, where she stated her opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine mandates and government-imposed lockdowns.
Gold expressed regret for entry into the Capitol building in a Jan. 12 interview with The Washington Post. “During the same interview Strand stated that he was also inside the U.S. Capitol with Gold and was there to protect Gold,” according to an official statement.
“I was misguided. I should not have entered,” Gold said. “Everything I did on January 6, misguided or not, was consistent with my effort to do my best for people.” She sounded emotional when she told Cooper that she was “shocked” the prosecutors believed she was not remorseful and did not intend to take part “in a situation that was so destructive to our nation.”
Strand—the communication director at AFLDS and Gold’s boyfriend—has been charged along with Gold. He has pleaded not guilty and rejected an offer for a plea agreement. Strand’s trial is scheduled for July 18.
Regarding Gold’s sentencing, an AFLDS press release on Thursday said, “Like most January 6 defendants, she is a victim of selective prosecution—the defining feature of corrupted governments.”
The Epoch Times has reached out to AFLDS for comment.
However, district Judge Christopher Cooper, a Barack Obama appointee, said that AFLDS was “leaving people with the misimpression that this is a political prosecution or that it’s about free speech,” as he delivered the sentence.
“January 6 was about a lot of things, but it wasn’t about the First Amendment or COVID vaccinations … the only reason you are here is where and when and how you chose to express your view,” Cooper said.
Gold had raised over $400,000 for her and the organization’s legal issues. Cooper said that the funds were a “disservice to the true victims that day.”
Gold’s attorney Dickson Young asked for a sentence of community medical service, stating that his client did not commit or incite violence.
“The loss of our country’s freedoms,” said Gold in a tweet on Friday regarding the sentencing.
Over 800 people have been charged with federal crimes over the breach on Jan. 6, with 300 pleading guilty and nearly 200 sentenced.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on June 16 pressed Dr. Anthony Fauci on the royalty payments he’s received while working for the federal government.
Recently disclosed information showed that Fauci was one of hundreds of scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to receive royalty payments. Fauci got 23 payments between October 2009 and September 2014, but it is unclear how much money he made.
“Can you tell me that you have not received a royalty from any entity that you ever oversaw the distribution of money in research grants?” Paul asked Fauci. “Have you ever received a royalty payment from a company that you later oversaw money going to that company?”
“I don’t know, as a fact, but I doubt it,” Fauci responded.
“Why don’t you let us know? Why don’t you reveal how much you’ve gotten, and from what entities?” Paul said.
The Epoch Times has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for all royalty payments that Fauci has received since becoming head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is part of the NIH, in 1984.
Open the Books received information in May showing that 1,675 NIH scientists received at least one payment during fiscal years 2010 to 2014, and that Fauci received 23 payments during that time.
In this image from video, Dr. Anthony Fauci testifies to a Senate panel via remote link. (The Epoch Times via the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee)
The amount of the payments is unclear “because of how these documents are redacted,” Open the Books said in a fact sheet.
The Associated Press previously found that Fauci received $45,000 between 1997 and 2004 in payments for interleukin-2, an experimental AIDS treatment. Fauci told the outlet at the time that he tried refusing the payments but was told that couldn’t happen, so he donated the money to charity. Fauci also said he tried reporting the payments on financial disclosures mandated for government employees but was told to remove them because they were considered federal compensation as opposed to outside income.
Adam Andrzejewski, founder and president of Open the Books, told The Epoch Times that every royalty payment “could be a conflict of interest” and urged the government to be transparent about the payments.
During Thursday’s hearing, Paul said his efforts to get the information have been stonewalled. “We asked them, the NIH, who got it and how much. They refused to tell us. They sent it redacted.”
Fauci defended the withholding of the information, telling Paul, “According to the regulations, people who have received royalties are not required to divulge them even on their financial statements, according to the Bayh–Dole Act.”
He then read off information he had brought up off-camera, which he said showed that from 2015 to 2020, the only royalties he received were for a monoclonal antibody he made.
“And during that period of time, my royalties range from $21 a year to $700 a year,” Fauci said. “The average per year was $191.46.”
THE MICROSOFT NEWS WEBSITE FOUNDED BY BILL GATES HURRIEDLY DELETED THE STUDY FROM ITS PAGES.
A research paper found that people who did not receive a COVID-19 vaccine had a lower rate of suffering a severe case of the virus amidst the pandemic.
The article, which has been uploaded to the preprint server ResearchGate, relied on data from over 18,500 respondents across 175 countries. Analysis revealed that individuals unvaccinated against COVID-19 reported fewer instances of hospitalization in comparison to their vaccinated counterparts.
MSN – a news website launched by vaccine enthusiast Bill Gates’s Microsoft in 1995 – covered the study, titling its article “Severe COVID-19 ‘Rare’ In Unvaccinated People,” but appears to have taken down the story since its publication. Archived versions of the article are still available, however.
The survey – “Self-reported outcomes, choices and discrimination among a global COVID-19 unvaccinated cohort“– was conducted from September 2021 through February 2022. Data collected for the survey was analyzed by an independent, international team of scientists led by Robert Verkerk, Ph.D., the founder and executive and scientific director of Alliance for Natural Health International.
“It is important to recognize that because the cohort represents a self-selected, as opposed to randomly selected, sample, the findings cannot be directly compared with other observational studies based on self-reported data based on randomly selected subjects,” emphasized the study.
Many of the unvaccinated individuals included in the analysis opted for natural treatments such as vitamin D, zinc, quercetin, and drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
The study also found that people unvaccinated against COVID-19 faced discrimination for their decisions, with between 20 to 60 percent of people per country reporting being personal targets of “hate or victimization.”
“Respondents reported feeling even more victimized by their respective states, with rates among respondents being greatest in Southern Europe (61%), Western Europe (59%), Australia and New Zealand (57%) and South America (57%),” explained the paper.
The survey follows additional studies reaching similar conclusions about the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. A Koch Institute report assessing data from the German government, for example, found that 80 percent of cases of the Omicron variant occurred in fully vaccinated people in the country.
We are now back to a national average gas price of $5.00/gallon. This is a subject of serious concern for almost everyone. Conservatives will (rightly) point to the Biden Administration’s hostility toward domestic oil production and distribution as the primary cause of the growing crisis, yet struggle to frame the problem in terms other than “the naïveté of environmentalist policy.” While the American ruling class is indeed dominated by extremely stupid people, its environmentalism is not “oh whoops we accidentally made gas cost way too much, who could have predicted that!”
Allowing it to be framed that way while giving conservative satirists plenty of low-hanging fruit to work with, is a massive mistake. It is easy to poke fun at the stupidity of people like Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and AOC. And that’s entirely the problem. These people are not sincerely-yet-naively attempting a solution to what they see as a truly apocalyptic disaster. It is a major mistake to assume they are ever operating in good faith. None of these people actually believe this stuff. They all have massive multimillion-dollar homes on coastlines they say will not exist by the end of the decade. It has been demonstrated ad nauseum that these people fly around in private jets, expending more fossil fuels in a single vacation than the average person will in their entire lives. You have to understand these are deeply cynical people. They do not care about the stuff they say they do. But what do they care about?
The most important filter to understand politics, especially politics in the Current Year, is Friend/Enemy distinction. Do not look at what these people say, look at what they do. And, look at who benefits from what they do or who is harmed by what they do. Who are the enemies of the occupational regime? Obviously, they will never explicitly state who it is they seek to destroy. Unless the pharmaceutical cocktail that allows the current president brief moments of lucidity is badly messed up, you are never going to hear him say “we want to totally impoverish and destroy the American middle and working class.” But every single day the actions of the regime speak as clearly as possible.
You need to stop giving these people the benefit of the doubt. They are not stupid, at least not the ones that truly matter. They are not misguided. They are not simply mistaken. They are intentionally malicious. It is not the naïveté of bleeding-heart liberals who get teary-eyed at the thought of punishing violent criminals that have caused the ruling regime to empty prisons and violent crime to exponentially increase. Yes, the naive liberal useful idiots who give them power are easily deluded by propaganda, but those who wield power know exactly what they are doing. They want the people they hate to be punished. They want white women and their babies to be run over by violent criminals who never should have been let out of prison. They want violent criminals to be released back into the wild, they want police to be terrified to fight them, and they want you to go to prison if you ever have to defend yourself against them. These are not accidents caused by well-meaning-but-naive libs—this stuff is by design.
“Climate change” is no different. For his entire presidential campaign, Joe Biden read carefully crafted scripts about reducing the use of fossil fuels, cutting oil production, increasing “clean energy,” etc. That the cost of gasoline is nearly triple what it was when he took office is not some accident of the inscrutable forces of the free market. The people who rule the American people want gasoline and diesel to be unaffordable for most of the country. Regular people—with jobs and families and mortgages—those people are the enemies of the regime. They want things to be more expensive for you. They want you to suffer.
They not only don’t care if you are impoverished, but it also brings them sick pleasure. You are their enemy. They want to destroy you. This should have been evident during the Wuhan Flu, the Mostly Peaceful Summer of George, and the Most Secure Election in History. What were those events, in truth? Whether you believe those events were 100% organic or they were operations of alphabet agencies and aligned NGOs or (most likely) some mixture of both, it doesn’t matter. What matters is both who benefited from these events and who was harmed. Who benefited from the lockdowns? Megacorporations, especially trillion-dollar hedge funds like Blackrock, which got the overwhelming majority of newly printed trillions (while you got a couple of tiny checks). In short, the greatest constituency of the regime benefitted from everything that happened in 2020. Every industry got hundreds of billions for almost nothing, Big Pharma got a huge boon, and the military-industrial complex now likewise gets to cash in on an absurdly expensive (even by War on Terror standards) proxy war with Russia. Everyone who was already filthy rich got even richer, all at your expense. Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and especially billionaire retailers like the Waltons and Bezos raked in the dough while their competitors were shut down.
And who was harmed by the events of 2020 (and beyond)? The greatest enemy of the regime, that’s who: the middle class, the people who have spent their entire lives toiling away to build businesses that provide services and goods and jobs for their neighbors, who donate to the things that make their communities worth living in, churches, local sports teams, youth activities, and service organizations. The regular people who have a stake in the places they live, who love their country and their neighborhoods, who want to live in peace and quiet, who simply want good order. That is who the regime hates the most. The few Norman Rockwell Americans who have the audacity to still exist. The regime was happy to allow your businesses to be locked down, while their billionaire friends could stay open. The regime was happy to allow organized violent revolutionaries to burn down your neighborhoods with almost no arrests and no investigation into the machinations behind the scenes. All of this while spending years holding men without trial in solitary confinement for walking through wide-open doors to the U.S. Capitol and spending years investigating an understandably overly exuberant protest of a fraudulent election. You need to filter everything that happens today through the friend/enemy distinction and politics becomes absolutely crystal clear.
This is why it cost so much to fill up your car and your grocery cart. The people in power hate you and your family. They are stupid and incompetent, but even worse, they are malicious. If you are a normal person, who just wants to have a job and home and family, who loves his country and loves his God, the people in power do not want you to exist. They want to make life as hard as possible for you. They do not want you to have children. And if you somehow can even have children, they want the children you do have to be groomed into disgusting freaks. You have an enemy that hates you. Do not ever forget it.
But you also have friends. The good news is that more and more people are starting to see they no longer live in the America they grew up in. More people are beginning to see that the America of “at the end of the day everyone is an American on the same team and we just disagree about some things” is dead. And while this is a great tragedy it is a necessity. We have to realize the thing we love is gone before we can begin to bring it back. And many people are now beginning to have that realization.
This is the very first step in things being made right again. Now you can organize around this principle, knowing who your friends are and who is on your side. From there you can build churches, build neighborhoods and towns, build communities dedicated to rebuilding Christian civilization, communities that will have the strength to weather together the difficult years to come. One in which you can recognize who your friends are and who your enemies are, only then will you have the ability to fight and build.
Andrew Isker is the pastor of 4th Street Evangelical Church in Waseca, MN. He is a graduate of Minnesota State University and Greyfriar’s Hall Ministerial Training School, and he has served churches in Missouri, West Virginia, and Minnesota. He is the author of the forthcoming book, The Boniface Option. Andrew, his wife Kara, and their five children reside in his hometown of Waseca, MN. He can be found on Gab @BonifaceOption.
Dr. Peter McCullough and co-author John Leake spoke to ‘American Thought Leaders’
During the research for their book, “The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex,” cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough and author John Leake discovered that the “system” was primed by global leaders to make vaccination the principal response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
“This was absolutely telegraphed from the beginning,” McCullough said. “[In] 2010, Gates says it’s the decade of the vaccines. Later on, Gates announces at meetings that the return on investment of vaccines is 20-to-1 anything else that he’s done.
“It is clear the system is juiced for a vaccine,” McCullough said during a recent interview with EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.
McCullough was referring to a 2010 post by Bill Gates on Twitter, in which the billionaire investor wrote: “Decade of Vaccines- a $10B, 10yr pledge for vaccine research, development & delivery.”
In 2019 Gates told CNBC’s Becky Quick on “Squawk Box” from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, “We feel there’s been over a 20-to-1 return” on his $10 billion investment into vaccine development.
In the interview with McCullough, Leake questioned why the COVID vaccines, which were developed hastily, were advertised as safe and touted as the only solution to the pandemic while effective alternative and off-label treatments were demonized.
“What we discovered in our research and what we map out in our book is that this was being planned for, well in advance,” Leake said.
He also criticized Gates for his obsession with vaccines.
Bill Gates attends a press conference on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on May 25, 2022. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
“[Gates] seems to have sort of shifted his monopolistic spirit from the software business to the vaccine business,” said Leake.
Gates is also the founder and major contributing member of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation (CEPI), which was launched at the World Economic Forum in 2017. In the organization’s business plan, it appears to be entirely focused on the development of vaccines, with no mention of other treatments for viral outbreaks, said McCullough.
CEPI says it brings together heads of government, private businesses, and philanthropists to “accelerate” the development of vaccines to prevent future “epidemics and pandemics” and to ensure that “all people in need” have access to these vaccines.
Moreover, one of Gates’ most recent efforts in the proliferation of vaccines is his book, “How to Prevent the Next Pandemic.” In the book, Gates makes the case for establishing a well-funded global organization that would be managed by the United Nations’ World Health Organization, whose job it would be to search for and respond to the world’s next pandemic, said McCullough.
The Epoch Times reached out to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for comment.
McCullough said that although vaccines generally do little to prevent illness from upper-respiratory infections, they were still pushed as the answer to the COVID-19 pandemic.
“There isn’t a single shot in the arm that does virtually anything for a respiratory illness,” McCullough said, adding that the COVID vaccines were introduced “with an implicit talking point, and the talking point is, ‘They are safe and they are effective, and you will take them.’ Period. No discussions after that. No official discussions on safety and efficacy, no guarantee for reevaluation, no monthly review of safety.”
The safety was just assumed, even after a Chinese scientific paper was published pointing out that there were major health problems from the vaccine for people with underlying health issues, said McCullough.
McCullough called this broad use of the vaccines a “biological catastrophe.”
Furthermore, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tried to bury information about the vaccines’ safety and efficacy by sealing, for 55 years, the “Pfizer dossier,” which is about half a million pages of documents detailing the key findings in the development and implementation of the vaccines, said McCullough.
The organization Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency sued the FDA under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and demanded the dossier be made public.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman said the group’s FOIA request was “of paramount public importance,” and ordered that the FDA release 55,000 pages per month (pdf).
From these documents, “we learned there were 1,223 deaths within 90 days of the release of the Pfizer program, worldwide. The standard is typically 50 deaths for some widely used product, [and it’s] taken off the market,” said McCullough
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) records deaths on its Vaccine Adverse Events Recording System (VAERS).
In the United States, McCullough said there have been 13,000 deaths recorded after receiving the COVID vaccine.
“That is astounding,” he said. “We have never let a product run like this for this period of time without revisiting safety, without reporting safety, without even questioning safety, and death being the final outcome.”
The Epoch Times reached out Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson for comment on vaccine safety.
“What I think a lot of the public didn’t understand is this is a completely novel technology,” said Leake. “These are genetic transfer technologies. You’re actually injecting messenger RNA that codes for the production of the spike protein, so this is Star Trek stuff.”
McCullough said it’s a false claim that vaccines reduce hospitalization and death.
He said there have been no thorough randomized trials with the active drug and placebo to show a reduction in hospitalization and death.
“None of the vaccines have had clinical trials done versus placebo with that composite endpoint,” said McCullough. “What’s happened over time is a false narrative that’s developed from observational data.”
There have been many “biased analyses by investigators and doctors and those in the biopharmaceutical complex who are invested in trying to promote the vaccines,” said McCullough
This file photo shows a box of ivermectin tablets. (Carl D. Master/Shutterstock)
He added that the analyses are based on faulty and biased data, which does not keep track of vaccinated individuals who come into a hospital. Instead, all who come into the hospital with a COVID infection are counted as unvaccinated by default.
“I can tell you those who’ve taken the vaccine are much more likely to have gotten early treatment, which really is the driver for reducing hospitalization and death,” said McCullough. He added that Gates, Anderson Cooper, and Vice President Kamala Harris all are vaccinated but also took Paxlovid, an early treatment for COVID-19.
Leake said the same rigor and safety standards that were applied to early treatment for COVID are completely ignored with the new messenger RNA vaccines. “Suddenly, the methodology and the rigor of ascertaining safety and efficacy is just thrown out the window with the vaccine,” he said.
McCullough said the pandemic could have ended quickly if resources had been put into giving high-risk patients early treatments with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, but instead these early treatments were maligned.
McCullough also brought up monoclonal antibodies, another safe and effective treatment that’s been throttled in favor of vaccines, he said.
Despite the fact that these early treatments work well, they are pulled off the shelf, but the vaccines, which are not proven to be either safe or effective, are pushed on the public as the solution for the pandemic, said McCullough.
Leake and McCullough described what they observed and documented as a “monolithic vaccine solution” for all public health problems.
“This is what these international foundations are: the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Wellcome Trust. The big money guys have put all of their money on vaccines,” said Leake.
Their book documents how other national institutions, like the National Institutes of Health, profit from these vaccines and from a relationship with wealthy philanthropists.
“They actually had a meeting at Bill Gates’ grand house near Seattle back in 2000. For 20 years, they’ve been working together,” said Leake.
There is a vaccine agenda, in which the powers that be want every person to keep getting vaccinated indefinitely, McCullough said.
“They have advanced it forward and there is at the same time an oblivion to safety, and it’s global,” said McCullough.
McCullough and Leake said they’d like to see all vaccine mandates lifted and all COVID-19 vaccines pulled off the shelves for a thorough safety and efficacy review.
“We have been burned,” McCullough said. “This has been, in a sense, the crime of our lifetime, if not of all time, of mass vaccination of the world in the middle of a highly prevalent and evolving pandemic.”
The only thing that could curb the current record-high gasoline prices would be a major drop in demand, i.e. a recession, according to several experts. Theoretically, a major shift in U.S. foreign and energy policy could make a difference too, but nobody seems to realistically expect that to happen.
Gas prices have particularly pained Americans, climbing in recent months to more than $5 a gallon. Some experts even consider it the driver of price inflation, which hit a four-decade high of 8.6 percent in May. The price hike has been caused by several factors piling up, including currency inflation, anti-carbon policy moves, misjudging the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“We’ve made a lot of policy errors in this country and overseas to put us in this situation and it’s not going to be easily fixed,” commented Phil Flynn, senior analyst with The Price Futures Group.
“If we start to reverse some of those policies, the market can start pricing in a better future.”
The American Petroleum Institute, an industry group, on June 14 released a list of 10 steps the U.S. government should take to boost domestic oil production, which still lags behind pre-pandemic levels and barely budged for half a year now. Top of the list is restarting drilling leases on federal land and speeding up project approvals.
But since the Biden administration has centered its agenda around “decarbonizing” the economy, chances of any pro-oil policy moves are expected to be nil.
Tight Supply
The administration has been begging foreign producers, from Saudi Arabia to Venezuela, to pump out more, but with little success.
“People are estimating that global spare production capacity can be as low as 2 million barrels a day,” Flynn said, noting that “we’ve already stretched the system to the limit.”
Refineries have emerged as another bottleneck with no apparent fix in sight. Refining capacity in the United States and Europe has been declining for years under the mantra of moving away from fossil fuels. Meanwhile, as the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020 and governments locked down large swaths of the economy and population, oil prices collapsed and the industry was stuck with massive excess capacity. The prospects at the time were deary. Not only was there no end of the pandemic in sight, but financial elites openly discussed using the crisis as an opportunity to move away from oil. Especially in the financial sector, the “environment, social, governance” (ESG) initiatives went into overdrive, promising to starve the oil industry of capital. Investment prospects in the industry took a severe hit.
“We had people predicting that oil demand would never get to pre-pandemic levels,” Flynn told The Epoch Times.
As it turned out, the pandemic didn’t cripple the economy quite as severely as expected. Many U.S. states quickly started lifting the lockdowns and by the end of the year just about returned to normal. The vaccine was delivered before the end of the year, allowing reopening even in most areas that were previously reluctant to do so. Demand quickly bounced back and so did the oil market.
U.S. oil product demand reached roughly the pre-pandemic level in June last year, even as domestic oil production still lagged about 2 million barrels per day (bpd) behind the pre-pandemic maximum of over 13 million bpd.
With the inauguration of President Joe Biden came a new era of “whole of government” anti-fossil fuel policy. The administration stopped leasing federal land for drilling and nixed the Keystone XL pipeline, further squashing long-term industry prospects.
To attract investors, oil companies adopted a strategy of “efficiency”—cut costs, cut development, and instead send their profits to stockholders. The strategy has somewhat worked, but only at the expense of future production and processing capacity.
The Biden administration has recently blamed refineries and oil companies for profiting from the high oil prices, which have been hovering around $120 a barrel for the past few days—more than double from a year ago.
But some experts have argued that it’s been the excessive government spending and the subsequent money printing by the Federal Reserve that has allowed the oil industry to raise prices so much without, so far, significantly affecting demand.
“The government never makes any mistakes. Have you ever noticed that,” Flynn quipped.
Excise tax on oil recently floated by the administration would be “disastrous for the economy,” he said.
“If you kill the refining margins, you’re going to kill the incentive to work and you’re going to have less supply,” he explained.
Ukraine Invasion
The Russian invasion of Ukraine earlier this year was timed to take advantage of the tight oil supply, according to Art Berman, geologist and energy expert.
“Putin knew what he was doing,” he told Wealthion’s Adam Taggart in a recent interview, noting the Russian President has a Ph.D. in energy economics.
Oil prices rallied on concerns that Western sanctions on Russia will prevent it from selling its oil.
Such expectations haven’t materialized. European countries still buy the majority of Russian oil and China and India continue to buy too, albeit at a discount.
E.U. leaders have been promising to ban oil imports from Russia, but Berman doesn’t believe that’s realistic.
“They’re absolutely incapable of doing that,” he said.
The U.S. and the E.U. could also put pressure on India to stop buying.
“But they haven’t done that yet because they know, at the end of the day, if they do that, oil prices will go to $300,” Flynn said.
Russia is the world’s second-largest oil producer and it appears there’s just not enough spare capacity available to exclude it completely.
There are already examples of clever schemes to dodge the sanctions. Russia-made diesel is mixed with diesel of other origins, resulting in a product that can be shipped to Europe without restrictions, Berman said.
Price Drop
Berman predicted oil prices will come down significantly, but only through “demand destruction.” He argued that, historically, inflation and high gas prices in particular have caused consumers to cut back. He expects that U.S. gas and diesel consumption could drop about 10 percent in the next 12–18 months. That could lead to an oil glut and price collapse, but it could very well also mean a recession.
From an investment perspective, Lance Roberts, chief investment strategist at RIA Advisors, warned that oil rallies tend to unwind just as suddenly as they build up.
“Oil prices are all driven by commodity traders. So oil prices are somewhat supply-demand driven, but a lot of it is these non-commercial speculators in the options markets that are driving oil prices through options contracts. Right now, everybody is ramping up their oil contracts,” he said during a recent Wealthion interview.
“Well at some point, somebody says, ‘I’m out.’ … He’s like the popular guy that brings all the people to a party. Whoever that guy is, when he says, ‘I’m out,’ the rest of the herd follows him.”
Flynn doesn’t see that happening—at least not in the short term.
“Technically, most people think we’re in a recession right now, but assuming that we are, it might be a mild recession,” he said.
He expects “real demand destruction” would only come if oil climbs even further, perhaps to $150 a barrel.
Both Flynn and Berman agreed that in the longer term, oil prices will remain high.
“We can see a big correction of $30 … I think it will recover … I think it would only be a pause in the bull market,” Flynn said.
The Fed’s flurry of interest rate hikes may be the wild card that could pull the rug from under the economy more broadly.
God…please bring back our true president, and evict the current resident. [US Patriot]
The White House and its allies are circulating a misleading talking point that the Biden administration is overseeing the most oil production in U.S. history.
Both White House chief of staff Ron Klain and resident Joe Biden have used the talking point as a response to Republican criticism that Democrats are discouraging domestic energy production through regulation and not issuing new drilling permits. Earlier this month, Klain shared a chart on Twitter showing oil production under Biden—at an annual average of 11.18 million barrels a day—was higher than any of his five predecessors. In March, Biden said the United States was “approaching record levels of oil and natural gas production.”
The claim from Democrats that domestic production is higher now than during the Trump administration is based on a comparison of four-year averages that includes the tremendous drop in economic activity at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Domestic oil production under Biden has yet to come close to the pre-pandemic levels reached under the prior administration, a more detailed Free Beacon analysis found.
The Free Beacon analysis of domestic crude oil production data shows that prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States produced just under 13 million barrels of oil per day at the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020. For comparison, that figure is more than 20 percent higher than the amount of oil the United States produced per day in September 2021. Energy industry expert James Wilson, who runs an oil and gas economics consulting firm, says the White House is abusing statistics to fit a narrative.
“You can claim anything with statistics,” Wilson told the Washington Free Beacon. “When COVID hit, the price of oil dropped and then production dropped. Surprise, surprise.”
The White House’s insistence on repeating the oil production claim bolsters the impression increasingly held by the public and some Democrats that the Biden administration is out of ideas to tackle rising prices. Even as the cost of gas skyrockets, the White House is sharing a months-old graph from liberal blogger Matthew Yglesias, a symptom of an office “defined by insularity,” as Politico has described it.
Lots of assertions on this website about why gasoline production is not keeping up with demand, but here’s a fact about US oil output: pic.twitter.com/VP0Rf95eP8
Domestic oil production trends prior to the pandemic show how misleading these sorts of claims are. For example, the United States produced an average of a million barrels more per day between the start of 2019 to April 2020 than the 11.185 million barrels a day averaged under Biden.
Biden told a group of labor union leaders on Tuesday that “I’m doing everything in my power to blunt Putin’s gas price hike” and blamed rising prices on “nothing else but that.” Despite that claim, federal data show that average daily domestic oil production in March, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, was lower than in November of last year.
Unlike during Trump’s final year in office, consumer demand for energy is elevated today. Total U.S. petroleum consumption is estimated to rise 730,000 barrels per day this year over last, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Some industry analysts point to macroeconomic trends out of the Biden administration’s control, such as oil companies’ reluctance to invest in new drilling sites because of shareholder pressure, as reasons for lower domestic production. That explanation, Wilson says, does not tell the full story.
“Another thing that’s inhibiting these guys from drilling is uncertainty about what this administration was and is going to do,” Wilson said, referring to new and potential future regulations against the oil and gas industry. “The bottom line is that when Trump was president, these companies started producing and oil was cheaper.”
Earlier this month gas prices hit an average of $5 a gallon nationwide. Industry analysts expect that price to only increase throughout the summer when more Americans travel for vacation.
The rising price of gas and household goods is the driving force behind Biden’s plummeting approval rating. A majority of voters say the economy is their top concern in multiple surveys, and a RealClearPolitics aggregate of recent polls shows Americans’ approval of Biden’s job performance is lower than at any time since he entered office.
A UK study by University College London has confirmed “small but significant” cases of the serious Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), a rare neurological disorder associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine for COVID-19.
The researchers speculate that “the majority or all” of the 121 UK cases of GBS (pdf) in March to April 2021 were associated with first doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine administered in January.
“A similar pattern is not seen with the other vaccines or following a second dose of any vaccine,” said lead author Prof. Michael Lunn on May 30.
The team observed that from January to October 2021, 996 GBS cases were recorded in the national database but with an unusual spike from March to April with about 140 cases per month rather than 100.
To identify whether any or all of these cases were linked to vaccination, the team linked dates of GBS onset to vaccination receipt for every individual and found that 198 GBS cases (20 percent of 966) occurred within six weeks of their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination in England; of these, 176 people had an AstraZeneca vaccination, 21 for Pfizer, and 1 for Moderna.
The researchers found no excess GBS cases associated with mRNA vaccines, but observed 5.8 excess cases of GBS per million doses of vaccine for AstraZeneca, equating to a total excess between January to July 2021 of around 98–140 cases, confirming the association between the vaccine and GBS.
GBS is a rare and serious neurological disorder that occurs when the immune system mistakenly attacks its own nerves, typically resulting in numbness, weakness, pain in the limbs, and sometimes even paralysis of breathing.
The disease is commonly associated with Campylobacter infections that prompt the body to attack its own nerves.
However, GBS cases were also observed in the 1976 following administration of the swine flu vaccine as well as modern influenza and yellow fever vaccines, though none of them had rates as high as AstraZeneca.
Whilst the majority of the vaccination-associated GBS patients had recovered from symptoms of weak limbs, weak deep tendon reflexes, and monophasic sleep, one patient in the study had recurring neuropathic symptoms well after the second dose.
The patient initially developed facial paralysis on both sides and a tingling sensation in their limbs after the first dose and improved with treatment. However, two weeks after receiving their second dose, they developed increasing weakness with pain, changes in their nerves, and only partial response to the treatment.
Researchers are currently still speculating the reasons behind rises in GBS cases following the vaccine.
“It may be that a non-specific immune activation in susceptible individuals occurs, but if that were the case similar risks might apply to all vaccine types,” said Lunn.
“It is therefore logical to suggest that the simian adenovirus vector, often used to develop vaccines, including AstraZeneca’s, may account for the increased risk.”
Studies in the United States have also confirmed increased cases of GBS after receiving adenovirus vector COVID-19 vaccines, with significant cases of the disease associated with the vaccine.
According to the CDC, 1 to 2 people out of 100,000 in the United States develops GBS, however, a 2022 U.S. study found the incidence in receivers of J&J’s adenovirus vaccines to be 32.4 per 100,000 people within 3 weeks following the vaccine; well above the background rate.
A spokeswoman for AstraZeneca told The Epoch Times that “vaccination of any kind is a known risk factor for GBS” and “the small number of GBS cases [following the AstraZeneca vaccine] appears similar to increases previously seen in other mass vaccination campaigns.”
She wrote that reports of GBS have been very rare following vaccination and that “current estimates show that globally the vaccine has helped prevent 50 million COVID-19 cases, five million hospitalizations, and to have saved more than one million lives.
“The Emergency Medical Associates and other international bodies including the WHO, have all stated that the benefits of vaccination continue to outweigh any potential risks.”
There is no remorse at the CDC. Far from it. The model of virus control deployed over the last 27 months is now part of normal operations. It wants it institutionalized.
The bureaucracy has now codified this into a new online tool that instructs cities and states precisely of what they are supposed to do given a certain level of community spread. The new tool doesn’t say lockdowns as such but the entire model of containment via masks and distancing is baked in, and it can be easily expanded at will.
To understand how absurd this is, consider that as of this writing, major parts of Southern Florida are supposed to be masked up, according to the map provided by the CDC, because COVID testing reveals high community spread.
Hardly anyone in Florida has worn a mask since 2020. The very notion is a joke there. However, what happens to the other states and what happens when or if political control of Florida changes to a pro-lockdown party?
Under the orange label (high), the following pertains:
Wear a mask indoors in public
Stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccines
Get tested if you have symptoms
Additional precautions may be needed for people at high risk for severe illness
Some standout points here. Masks have nowhere controlled the spread of COVID. We know this from countless examples all over the world. They have been a spectacular failure except as signals to others to feel a sense of alarm at the presence of disease. Neither have vaccinations achieved the stopping or even slowing of infection or spread. Note the new language too: “Stay up to date.” Vaccinations are headed toward the WEF ideal of subscription plans.
As for “additional precautions” we know what that means: lockdowns. Even now, the suggestions are to
Follow CDC recommendations for isolation and quarantine, including getting tested if you are exposed to COVID-19 or have symptoms of COVID-19
Implementing screening testing or other testing strategies for people who are exposed to COVID-19 in workplaces, schools, or other community settings as appropriate
Implement enhanced prevention measures in high-risk congregate settings
Consider setting-specific recommendations for prevention strategies based on local factors
We’ve seen this movie before. It’s a recipe for full government control of life.
In addition, this new tool can easily move to a next iteration by the addition of a red color: it could mean shelter in place, close the schools, don’t go to church, don’t see friends, and so on. I’ll say it again, there is no remorse, no regret, no rethinking at all. No admission of error. On the contrary, it is all part of the plan to do it over again.
In fact, a different version of the chart above, updated as of this posting, already has a code red, and it pertains to the entire country (one version measures “levels” and the other measures “transmission”).
Now, you might say that these are just recommendations, and the CDC makes such goofy recommendations all the time (cook your beef well done). The trouble is that it puts the burden to reject the recommendations on politicians at the state and local level. For that matter, there is nothing really in place that would stop a public health department anywhere in the country from implementing them on their own.
Anyone objecting is immediately on the back foott, attempting to justify the refusal to obey the CDC and thereby opening themselves up to the accusation that they are killing grandma and so on.
It truly boggles the mind that the CDC has rethought nothing given the carnage we face in the country today. They talk about “the data” and the science but pay attention to almost none of it. They forever fall back on their new doctrines and, mostly, their power.
This is about much more than lockdowns. It’s about life itself, particularly as it affects economics.
A new poll from the Wall Street Journal reveals that the percent of Americans who think the economy is poor or not so good is an incredible 83 percent. Maybe that doesn’t surprise you and gives rise to the question of what demographic constitutes the 17 percent who think things are just fine. Maybe employees at the NIH, CDC, DHS, Pfizer, and Moderna?
Ok, I take it back: too cynical. The truth is that economic prospects now are just awful. And it’s not just inflation. It’s class mobility, demoralization, goods availability, and a general sense that hope in the future isn’t what it used to be just a few years ago. That will surely have a big effect on November’s midterm elections. The winning candidates will make elaborate promises to fix the problems but how many among them will be openly critical of COVID mandates? Not many.
This matters because the connection is direct. My personal frustration is that massive failure on the part of the media, intellectuals, and average people to make the connection between the hell of the last 27 months—in the name of disease control—and these economic, cultural, educational, and social outcomes.
For some odd reason I cannot fathom, there is a general impression out there that economic life exists in some insulated machine that is somehow detached from life experience. Therefore it can be turned on and off. We turned it back on, so why aren’t things going back to normal?
Well, most all the suffering people are experiencing today traces to catastrophic policy pushed by the CDC with White House deference, thereby prompting the entire public-health machinery around the country to swing into action, closing schools, businesses, churches, and giving Congress an excuse to spending some $6T (at least) through debt finance that was quickly added to the Fed’s balance sheet via money printing. The closures interrupted supply chains and shattered economic and social functioning. The fallout is what we see all around us.
We’ve just experienced years in which it was demonstrated to the United States and the entire world how pandemic control can be deployed to utterly crush rights, freedoms, constitutional limits on states, and even everything we call civilization itself.
What the CDC pushed on the country, even the world, was without precedent. The resulting disasters are everywhere present. At minimum we should expect the CDC to cease and desist, and certainly not entrench and codify. That the latter is taking place reveals what a long struggle lies ahead.
They have 30 days to respond to letters before being placed on a financial blacklist
Six banks have been warned by the West Virginia State Treasury that they may be in violation of a new law preventing the state from doing business with financial institutions boycotting energy companies.
The office told The Epoch Times it had sent out letters on June 10, but didn’t share the banks’ names on the record.
Enacted in March, S. 262 directs the state to notify financial institutions that they’re slated for placement on the restricted financial institution list 45 days before the document is published.
Those institutions must respond within 30 days of receiving those notification letters to avoid winding up on the list.
In June 2021, Texas passed a similar law barring state agencies from investing in funds boycotting energy companies.
“We felt like we had a clear conflict of interest,” West Virginia Treasurer Riley Moore said at a June 8 press conference.
He cited firms that he said want to benefit from the state’s finances while simultaneously “trying to diminish our dollars and destroy our industries.”
The letters come after months of escalating conflict between many energy-producing states and much of the financial sector.
In May 2021, Moore and treasurers from 14 other states sent a letter to U.S. climate envoy John Kerry to express their concerns about private comments that he made to banks in March of that year. He reportedly asked major financial institutions to step up their climate commitments.
“We intend to put banks and financial institutions on notice of our position, as we urge them not to give in to pressure from the Biden administration to refuse to lend to or invest in coal, oil, and natural gas companies,” Moore and his colleagues wrote at the time.
Environmental nonprofits mounted their own pressure campaign encouraging Kerry to further Wall Street’s divestment from the fossil fuel industry.
A March 2021 letter from 145 environmental organizations demanded that Kerry “[end] the flow of private finance” to the fossil fuel industry, specifically requesting that he push asset managers “to divest from pure-play coal, oil, and gas.”
In January of this year, West Virginia divested from BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager.
“BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has been outspoken in pressuring corporate leaders to commit to investment goals that will undermine reliable energy sources like coal, natural gas and oil under the guise of helping the planet, but at the same time he’s pouring billions in new capital into China, turning a blind eye to abhorrent human rights violations, genocide and that country’s role in creating the COVID-19 global pandemic,” Moore said in a Jan. 17 statement explaining the decision.
Moore told The Epoch Times he hasn’t yet heard from BlackRock.
In his view, the war in Ukraine underscores the vital importance of maintaining domestic energy resources.
“There is power in this type of energy, and I just don’t mean electrification. I mean, power for the countries. And that’s why energy independence is so important,” he told The Epoch Times in a June 8 interview.
Moore said it would be “very easy” to get West Virginia to change its increasingly aggressive stance toward financial institutions that have turned against fossil fuels or embraced extreme environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investment practices.
“All you all need to do is have banks act like banks, asset managers act like asset managers, and maximize returns for your shareholders and your company. It’s pretty simple. I mean, that’s kind of how capitalism works,” he said.
The Epoch Times has requested additional information on the six banks from the West Virginia Treasury.
The Epoch Times has also reached out to BlackRock.
Once again, it appears that the science of COVID-19 and its origins is the science that is conducted among small groups of insiders behind closed doors.
Newly released government emails from early February 2020 reveal that additional secret teleconferences took place among a group of Fauci-funded scientists in the early days of the pandemic.
Up to now, we knew of the Feb. 1 secret teleconference that had been convened by Fauci. We also knew that scientists at the Feb. 1 teleconference privately concluded that the virus most likely came out of the Wuhan lab. And we knew that by Feb. 4, those scientists had written a paper that dismissed the lab leak theory.
What we did not know is that the same scientists continued having secret teleconferences to discuss the virus’s origins even after they wrote their paper. At least two of those conferences were attended by Fauci himself.
The new emails were obtained by the transparency group US Right to Know, but—as is now the norm for Freedom of Information Act requests from the federal government—the emails are almost completely redacted.
Piecing together the newly released emails with other emails that were released earlier, we can now put together an updated timeline of events after the initial Feb. 1 secret teleconference.
Defending the Republic, a Texas-based non-profit filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration for refusing to turn over records related to the approval of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines.
The group filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking the production of records relating to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) internal review process of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine marketed as “Spikevax.” Given that the forces impacting the FDA’s decision to authorize the vaccine could have influenced Americans’ decision on whether or not to get vaccinated against COVID-19, Defending the Republic requested expedited processing of relevant records.
“Please provide all data and information submitted by Moderna relating to the FDA review and approval of Spikevax. This includes, but is not limited to, all safety and effectiveness data and information; all data and information in the biological product file; and all ingredients,” outlined the initial FOIA request.
On February 9th, less than a week after the initial FOIA was filed, the FDA refused the request for expedited processing, prompting Defending the Republic to appeal the decision.
“The FDA declined the appeal, leaving Defending the Republic with no choice but to file this action seeking a court order requiring the FDA produce the requested records on an expedited schedule— just as those who obtained a court order for the expedited production of records relating to the FDA approved Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine,” explains a complaint filed by Defending the Republic.
Defending the Republic was especially interested in better understanding the review process for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, as data has shown its risk were not adequately explained to those receiving it and data surrounding its efficacy remains obscured. As Defending the Republic explains:
Despite the FDA’s promises, a closer inspection of the Spikevax approval reveal there may be glaring issues in the approval process. The Spikevax package insert concedes “[a]vailable data on SPIKEVAX administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy.” And while the FDA publicly pronounced that the “data demonstrated that Spikevax was 93% effective in preventing COVID-19,” the Spikevax fact sheet for recipients and caregivers provides important context omitted by the public officials: “The [Spikevax] duration of protection against COVID19 is currently unknown.
The lawsuit comes amidst several National Pulse exposés revealing how lobbyists from pharmaceutical companies including Moderna have entrenched themselves within Washington, D.C.
SPECIAL REPORT – The totalitarian Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is not only engaged in global and national influence campaigns, but its corrupting tentacles also reach even down to American state and local politics. (RELATED: China’s Draconian Policies Show What Many Democrats Want for US)
Over the past 15 years, U.S. officials at local, state and federal levels have received pressure through visits, emails and phone calls from Chinese officials intent on pushing their policies in China’s favor.
As I have written about here, here and here, the CCP tends to focus its corrupting influences on currently powerful, as well as up-and-coming Democrat politicians, most vulnerable to their pitch.
However, a recent report in The Epoch Times (ET) shows how the CCP’s tentacles extend down to the state level and also target Republicans.
Usually, these efforts take the form of promoting apparently benign resolutions of friendship between U.S. states and China, or statements in support of Chinese policies.
In one specific case, writes The Times in “late February 2020, as the pandemic was heating up in the United States, when a request from China caught Wisconsin state Sen. Roger Roth’s attention.”
Roth is a Republican, and the request came via email from Wu Ting, wife of the Chinese consul general in Chicago. Wu wanted Roth to help pass a resolution “in support of China’s fight against the novel coronavirus.”
Once Roth realized the email was legitimate, he became “downright angry.”
“I dictated a one-word response to them, and I said: Dear Consul General, Nuts. Signed respectfully, Roger Roth,” he said. “Not only do we respond to them with the word ‘nuts,’ we even drafted our own resolution on the Communist Party of China, exposing who they really are.”
That one-word reply, a nod to Brig. Gen. Anthony McAuliffe’s famous response to a German surrender ultimatum during World War II, was the last communication Roth had with the Chinese consulate in Chicago. Wu later wrote an email expressing shock at his response, which he never replied to. But that interaction pushed him onto the offensive in Wisconsin.
States which have not been so staunch in their response to Chinese influence efforts include, most egregiously, the New York Senate resolution that was approved in June 2019, which appears to be the nation’s first official gesture to commemorate Oct. 1, marking the CCP’s official violent takeover of China.
The resolution’s lead sponsor, state Sen. James Sanders, didn’t respond to inquiries from The Epoch Times about whether the consulate had any role in the resolution’s eventual adoption.
As ET notes though, these aren’t the only states where Beijing has tried to exert influence:
Around the same period as the emails to Roth, the state of Utah was approving a resolution expressing solidarity with the Chinese people. In language similar to what Wu had put forward, the resolution noted “a friendly relationship and strong economic, cultural, and people-to-people ties” that Utah and China share, and “the unique, 14-year legislative relationship between Utah and Liaoning.”
That Feb. 25, 2020, resolution also urged against virus restrictions that “unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade and raise fear and stigma.” At the time, the Trump administration had imposed a flight ban to and from China in response to the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, a move that initially sparked condemnation from the Chinese regime and the World Health Organization…
States like Utah that passed such resolutions didn’t know “what was really happening and how they were being used as pawns,” Roth said.
Georgia and New York also have passed a “China Day” resolution.
The Georgia version, passed in 2020, intended to “commend the special friendship between Georgia and the People’s Republic of China” and to “recognize the Consul General Cai Wei of the Consulate General of China in Houston.”
So, what else can be done about this massive Chinese effort to corrupt our state politicians and institutions?
Roth, the Wisconsin senator, has some excellent ideas.
Since his encounter with the Chinese, reports The Times, he has proposed a series of measures aimed at curtailing Chinese influence in his state.
These include barring Chinese military members from working in the University of Wisconsin system and curbing Chinese recruitment or propaganda programs within the university system.
As Roth stated in The Epoch Times: “As lawmakers all over the country, everything we do plays into a larger narrative,” he said. And we have an opportunity, though it be limited … we have an opportunity to make a stand for freedom, and to make a stand for the freedom-loving peoples of China right now, or who are held hostage by this brutal regime.” ALD
THE DELETED WEBPAGE DETAILED A STUDY ON A “MILD, EXPERIMENTAL SMALLPOX VACCINE KNOWN AS MODIFIED VACCINIA ANKARA (MVA)” AND HOW IT IS “NEARLY AS EFFECTIVE AS THE STANDARD SMALLPOX VACCINE IN PROTECTING MONKEYS AGAINST MONKEYPOX.”
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) deleted a webpage from 2004 detailing research into vaccine efficacy against the monkeypox virus which included Anthony Fauci praising the findings as “important” and referencing a potential “bioterror threat involving smallpox.”
The webpage can be accessed through an archived version of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website, which reveals a press release from March 10th, 2004: “Effectiveness of Safer Smallpox Vaccine Demonstrated Against Monkeypox.”
When accessed, the link currently prompts users with the message “the page you’re looking for isn’t available.”
NIH DELETED WEBPAGE.
The unearthed webpage comes amidst an ongoing global outbreak of monkeypox cases, already causing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to recommend masks during travel.
The deleted webpage detailed a study on a “mild, experimental smallpox vaccine known as modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA)” and how it is “nearly as effective as the standard smallpox vaccine in protecting monkeys against monkeypox.” Monkeypox was the pathogen of choice for the study “because of its similarity to the smallpox virus,” explained the NIH press release.
The study was conducted by researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the NIH agency led by Fauci. This agency has previously come under scrutiny for funding bat coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which many public health experts and intelligence officials believe to be the source of COVID-19.
“These findings are important to the search for a replacement vaccine for people with health conditions that would prevent them from using the current smallpox vaccine,” said Fauci in response to the study, which reportedly found that an MVA injection in conjunction with a Dryvax injection yielded better coverage than Dryvax alone.
“In addition, because an initial MVA injection may help lessen the side effects experienced from Dryvax, MVA may serve as an important pre-vaccine for large-scale vaccination efforts in the event of a bioterror threat involving smallpox,” he added.
Fauci was reacting to the study “Immunogenicity of a Highly Attenuated MVA Smallpox Vaccine and Protection Against Monkeypox,” whose abstract also warns of the “potential use of smallpox as a biological weapon”:
“The potential use of smallpox as a biological weapon has led to the production and stockpiling of smallpox vaccine and the immunization of some healthcare workers.”
The study’s abstract continues, describing “another public health goal is the licensing of a safer vaccine” to treat smallpox:
As vaccines can no longer be tested for their ability to prevent smallpox, licensing will necessarily include comparative immunogenicity and protection studies in non-human primates. Here we compare the highly attenuated modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) with the licensed Dryvax vaccine in a monkey model.
The deleted study follows The National Pulse unearthing the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s recent research assembling strains of the monkeypox virus to be able to conduct PCR tests. It also comes amidst the NIAID administering a $10 million grant to fund research into additional cures for monkeypox shortly before the current outbreak began.
He promised to ‘shut down the virus.’ He failed miserably.
Resident Joe Biden celebrated another grim milestone this week as his approval rating continues to flounder. Despite pledging to “shut down the virus” during the 2020 campaign, Biden has now presided over the deaths of more than 600,000 Americans from COVID-19.
That is more than twice the number of U.S. soldiers who perished in combat during World War II.
The virus our president promised to shut down has killed approximately 1,008,712 Americans, according to Johns Hopkins University, which means that Biden is responsible for almost 200,000 (or 50 percent) more COVID deaths than his predecessor, Donald Trump.
By his own logic, Biden should have resigned a long time ago.
The approximately 600,261 Americans killed on Biden’s watch is three times the number of COVID deaths he said should disqualify a president from serving in the White House. During an October 2020 debate against Trump, he argued that any leader who presided over more than 200,000 COVID deaths “should not remain as president of the United States.”
Days later, Biden delivered an emphatic message to the American people via his Twitter account. “I’m not going to shut down the economy,” he wrote on the popular social networking website. “I’m going to shut down the virus.”
A majority of New Yorkers say their city is headed in the wrong direction under Democratic mayor Eric Adams, according to a Siena College poll released Tuesday.
Fifty-six percent of respondents said the city is headed in the wrong direction, while an overwhelming majority—70 percent—said they feel less safe than when the pandemic began. Adams’s approval rating, meanwhile, is underwater: Just 29 percent of New Yorkers said his performance has been “excellent” or “good,” while 64 percent said it has been “fair” or “poor.”
Spectrum News NY1, which commissioned the poll, published the results on the same day that residents in another leftwing city are pushing back against their far-left leaders. Radical San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin (D.), whose soft-on-crime policies led to the release of a serial criminal who went on to kill two people, on Tuesday faces a recall effort organized by members of his own party, who say he is too extreme even for famously liberal San Francisco. Recent polling indicates that a majority of San Franciscans want Boudin out.
While Adams said this week that shootings in New York are trending downward, overall crime jumped 28 percent last month, Spectrum News reported Friday. Grand larcenies, burglaries, robberies, and gun arrests all rose.
While Adams has said addressing homelessness is a priority, 49 percent of New Yorkers said he’s doing a poor job on the issue. Forty-five percent said he’s also doing a poor job on fighting crime.
New Yorkers are similarly unhappy with Democratic state leaders, including Governor Kathy Hochul. A plurality of respondents, 46 percent, said the state is heading in the wrong direction, and a majority, 54 percent, called Hochul’s performance only “fair” or “poor.”
The poll respondents are far from the only New Yorkers to show their dissatisfaction with left-wing leadership. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, New Yorkers have fled the Empire State in droves, with many heading to Republican-led states such as Texas and Florida.
Many former Gothamites told the New York Post they left the state because of leftwing policies such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and high taxes. The state’s tax base shrank in 2020 by $19.5 billion, the Wall Street Journalreported last week.
SIOUX FALLS, S.D.—Many politicians turn to social media platforms or television ads to get their message out. But South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem and U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) decided they wanted to “take the pulse of the people” themselves, opting to travel door-to-door through a subdivision in Sioux Falls to meet their constituents on June 4 and listen to their concerns.
Noem and Johnson, both Republicans, also wanted to thwart negative ads that have recently begun airing throughout the state.
“The air war is not what wins elections in South Dakota—it’s the ground game,” Johnson told The Epoch Times during his door-to-door tour of the neighborhood. “It is going out and talking to voters and answering questions—this is how victory gets done.”
The top issue for the people of South Dakota is inflation, Noem told The Epoch Times as she walked with Johnson through the neighborhood. She said people are worried about the price of fuel and food—kitchen table issues.
“We are hearing a lot of concern about inflation,” she said. “People feel it every single day.”
Noem and Johnson agree that inflation is “higher than it should be” and blame the current administration, as “trillions of dollars have been spent unnecessarily.”
“We’ve got an administration that has put trillion-dollar package after trillion-dollar package,” Johnson said of national inflation. “I voted against them [spending packages], and we need to focus on needs and not wants at the federal level—that’s what I have been focused on.”
U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem campaign together in a Sioux Falls neighborhood on June 4, 2022. (Jann Falkenstern/The Epoch Times)
Sioux Falls resident Sondra McFadden said she “couldn’t believe her eyes” when she answered the front door of her home and saw the governor and a congressman.
“She’s really here,” she said of the visit. “I just love her [Noem] because she stands up for what she believes, and she looks out for all of South Dakota.”
McFadden said the governor is doing a “fantastic job” in protecting the conservative values that South Dakotans have maintained for many years. She said she’s “worried about the state of the nation” but is thankful to live in the state, and she’s “thankful for her governor.”
McFadden gives the governor credit for “keeping the state open” during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“She kept the state open, which helped the economy during the pandemic,” she said. “I look at other states who locked down and they are so much worse off for it—we are thriving because of the decisions the governor has made for our state.”
Noem said there’s a reason why people are “grateful to live in South Dakota.”
“Our state has the number one economy,” she said. “Everybody works—our incomes are rising faster than in any other state—so we’ve got a great story to tell. It’s a story of helping people make the best decisions for themselves and South Dakota is thriving because of that.”
Johnson agreed.
“The thing I love about South Dakotans is their optimism, and they’ll listen and ask you the tough questions,” he said of his constituents. “But they know how lucky they are to be living in South Dakota. Because of Kristi’s administration, people realize that their freedoms were not reduced here. … We did it right here.”
Neither the governor nor the congressman are fans of the policies of the Biden administration and the president’s latest move to punish states such as South Dakota with reduced funding for approving legislation that outlaws transgender males from competing in girls’ sports.
“It’s a horrific thing to take food off the plates of our children in order to push your agenda,” Noem said. “It’s a dangerous threat—a terrible threat. If he moves forward with this policy, then I will sue them in federal court. And we will win.”
Johnson echoed Noem’s sentiments.
“Biden is trying to use free and reduced school lunches as a lever to compel states to do what you want around transgendered athletes,” he said. “Biden wants to try to punish those kids because South Dakota and other states don’t fall in line with his views. I haven’t found one person in South Dakota who’s buying what he’s selling.”
On June 7, South Dakotans will go to the polls to vote in the primary elections for who they would like to see on the ballot this November. Both incumbents say they are excited to serve their constituents for another term.
“Kristi and I are wired very similarly,” he said of the Republican governor. “One of the reasons we get along so well is that she is a conservative who’s focused on actually solving problems.”
Noem said Johnson is a great advocate for South Dakota.
“He works hard and he cares about people,” she said of Johnson. “He’s doing it for the right reasons.”
Correction: Noem is traveling through Sioux Falls, not Sioux City. The Epoch Times regrets the error.
This episode will premiere on June 7 at 7:30 p.m. ET.
“What we’ve learned is an unbelievable story of poor safety. In fact, I think it’s basically a biological catastrophe on our hands,” says Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, and leading expert on COVID-19 treatment.
In this episode, we sit down with Dr. McCullough and author John Leake, co-authors of “The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex.”
Why is much of the world’s public health apparatus fixated on mass vaccination, even now?
Is monkeypox really a threat? Or is something else going on?
Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode.
Former Pfizer VP: ‘Massive Fraud Playing Out on a Global Scale,’ Reckless to Vaccine the Whole Population
In order to get an insider’s view, we spoke with Dr. Michael Yeadon, former chief scientific officer at Pfizer’s Global Allergy & Respiratory Research Department.
We discussed many topics, such as how, in his professional opinion, there is no safe way to combat a pandemic with a vaccine—since the necessary safety trials take longer than the length of the pandemic—that it’s reckless to attempt to vaccinate an entire population, and that if we continue down the path we’ve been traveling over the past two years, it will lead to total global control by a small group of elites.
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs denied a life-saving lung transplant to U.S. Army veteran because he is not vaccinated against COVID-19.
James Jooyandeh’s requests for both a referral for the transplant and a religious exemption from the vaccine were recently denied by the Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital in Wisconsin where Jooyandeh has been treated for the past several years.
Jooyandeh, a former tank commander for the U.S. military, suffers from advanced stages of pulmonary fibrosis.
“Unfortunately, we are unable to offer lung transplant as a treatment option for you due to your unwillingness to receive recommended routine health maintenance, including your vaccinations, which is an absolute contraindication to lung transplantation at our center,” wrote Jooyandeh’s primary care physician Dr. Samir Sultan, a transplant pulmonologist with the VA hospital in Wisconsin, and Dr. James Maloney, chief of surgical services at the Veterans Hospital.
In an exclusive interview with The EpochTimes, Jooyandeh and wife Deborah told The Epoch Times they are both against the COVID-19 vaccine because fetal cell lines were used in the development and testing of the vaccine and because of the vaccine’s potential health risks.
“One of the side effects that was just released was interstitial lung disease and that’s what we have,” Deborah Jooyandeh told The Epoch Times, “so why would he take a vaccine that causes what’s killing him.”
Jooyandeh said he is also feeling “slighted” by the very administration he for so long served. Following a 13-year tour in the U.S. Army, Jooyaneh served eight years in the National Guard and five years in the Army Reserve.
Now 52, as a civilian he worked as a merchandiser for Nestle and does not have the means to afford a lung transplant out of pocket. His only choice is to use his VA benefits.
In order to do that, a VA doctor must write a referral to a facility since VA hospitals do not perform transplants themselves. The VA mostly refers veterans in need of transplants to Vanderbilt University Hospital in Tennessee.
Vanderbilt does not require the COVID-19 vaccine for transplant patients, but Sultan, as records show, still refused to make the referral.
Both he and Maloney acknowledged in their letter that Jooyandeh “is significantly impaired due to his lung condition,” but refused to reconsider their decision.
They also refused to consider Jooyandeh’s request for a religious exemption.
What remains unclear is what VA policy Sultan and Maloney are following in refusing to give Jooyandeh a referral for his much needed lung transplant.
In a letter preceding their denial of Jooyandeh’s request for a referral, John Rohrer, director of the Transplant and Surgical Service Department of Veterans Affairs in Wisconsin stated in a letter that he had confirmed from the hospital’s “coordinator” that the COVID-19 vaccine is required “per current Lung Transplant program guidelines.”
However a spokesman for the VA was unable to provide The Epoch Times with the VA’s policy on referring veterans who are not vaccinated against COVID-19 for a transplant.
Rohrer also did not respond to inquiries by The Epoch Times asking him to clarify what guidelines he was referring to.
Sultan and Maloney, who adid not respond to inquiries from The Epoch Times, cited the recommendations of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) as a basis for their decision.
In March, The Epoch Times reported that Pfizer is one of UNOS corporate sponsors. Private hospitals who have denied unvaccinated patients transplants have too cited UNOS policies for their position. In response, UNOS issued a statement to The Epoch Times emphasizing their recommendations are not mandates and hospitals are free to make their own decisions regarding transplants for unvaccinated patients.
Last month, the Liberty Counsel sent the VA a formal request for an emergency referral on behalf of Jooyandeh, but according to Deborah Catalano, senior counsel for the civil rights organization, the VA has yet to respond to her April 15 request.
“We are talking about a man who served his country and probably saved lives and now the very administration he served under is willing to let him die,” she told The Epoch Times.
Jooyandeh’s lung condition may stem from his military service. While he admitted he smoked, Jooyandeh also was part of an Army unit tasked with burning spent ammo and other munitions in an open pit.
Jooyandeh, who has no other comorbidities, told The Epoch Times he believes Sultan is operating on his own personal beliefs and has “blacklisted him to a point where no one else will override him.”
He even wrote a negative report about Jooyandeh refusing to take medication, even though his medical records show he had an adverse reaction to it.
“He’s continuously standing in our way,” said Jooyandeh, “it’s like he’s bruising my records to make me look uncooperative.”
Catalano said she questions why the VA would even care if Jooyandeh is vaccinated since none of their hospitals would be performing the transplant.
“The VA is denying their access to health care, nobody is asking the VA to perform it,” she said “it should grant the religious exemption or just let them go to Vanderbilt and pay for it.”
Catalano pointed to a recent study that shows the VA is in the minority when it comes to refusing to make referrals for unvaccinated patients in need of a major organ transplant.
According to the study, which was conducted by the American Journal of Transplantation, out of 141 U.S. transplants centers surveyed, 60.7 percent reported that the COVID vaccination was not required in order to receive a transplant.
First Liberty sent a demand letter to Oakland University in Michigan on behalf of Inara Ramazanova. The university wrongfully evicted the recent graduate from campus housing because she shared information on social media about how to request a COVID-19 vaccine religious accommodation. The university accused her of “conspiracy or collusion” under its code of conduct.
The eviction from campus housing forced Inara to spend her final semester at home. It placed a disciplinary record in her student file, which could potentially affect her future academic or professional pursuits.
We’re asking the university to apologize to Inara for discriminating against her, and to vindicate her record and her name. This action is critical in our ongoing fight to hold colleges and universities around the nation accountable.
We explain in our letter:
“Oakland University’s disciplining and evicting Ms. Ramazanova because she shared about her religious convictions regarding vaccination and about how she sought and received a religious accommodation from Oakland University—all in an effort to more effectively exercise her civil rights and aid others in doing the same—violated Ms. Ramazanova’s rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects free speech and religious exercise, and the federal Fair Housing Act, which prohibits both religious discrimination in housing and taking actions against a person for aiding others in having their religious rights in housing respected.”
Evicted for Sharing Religious Information
Last summer, Oakland University granted Inara a religious accommodation from the university’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The accommodation would have allowed the Russian immigrant to reside on campus for the 2021–22 academic year.
However, Oakland University then evicted Inara from campus after she shared about her request and accommodation in a Facebook group with the hope that it would be useful to others. In fact, many members in the group had already asked questions on how to best express their sincerely held religious beliefs and obtain a religious accommodation.
Though Inara merely shared her story to lend a helping hand to others in the group, the University Conduct Committee claimed her posts amounted to “collusion or conspiracy.”
Justin Butterfield, Deputy General Counsel at First Liberty, said that’s unconstitutional and illegal:
“The university violated Inara’s Constitutional rights and the Fair Housing Act. They owe it to her to clear her record”.
Unfortunately, Inara’s case is not the first of its kind, as students, employees, and even military service members continue to be discriminated against for living out their faith and engaging in constitutionally protected speech.
That’s why our legal term is leading this crucial effort to stop discrimination against Inara and people of all faiths across the country. Religious students should not be treated as second-class citizens. It’s wrong and unlawful to punish them, threaten their careers and even tarnish their record simply because they shared their beliefs with others.
Please give now and join First Liberty in this fight. Your support is critical to help Inara vindicate her record and clear her name, so she and millions of Americans don’t have to face unjust punishment for living out their faith.
Five Republican senators have asked National Institutes of Health (NIH) Acting Director Lawrence Tabak for a comprehensive accounting of every royalty payment by an outside source to an employee of the federal agency since 2009.
“We believe that the American taxpayer deserves to know 1) the degree to which government doctors and researchers have a financial interest in drugs and products they support, and 2) whether any relationship exists between federal grants awarded by NIH and royalty payments received by NIH personnel,” the senators told Tabak in a letter that was made public on June 1.
“Additionally, Americans deserve greater transparency in how the hundreds of millions in royalty payments NIH receives are distributed, and the degree to which NIH’s leadership—already among the highest-paid individuals in the federal bureaucracy—has benefited from this ‘hidden’ revenue stream.”
The five senators are Rand Paul of Kentucky, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Rick Scott of Florida. Tabak has been acting NIH chief since his predecessor, Dr. Francis Collins, resigned in December after leading the agency for a dozen years.
The GOP senators’ letter was prompted by revelations first reported by The Epoch Times based on information obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) submitted to NIH by Open the Books, an Illinois-based nonprofit government watchdog.
“We estimate that up to $350 million in royalties from third parties were paid to NIH scientists during the fiscal years between 2010 and 2020,” Open the Books CEO Adam Andrzejewski said in a telephone news conference on May 9.
“We draw that conclusion because, in the first five years, there has been $134 million that we have been able to quantify of top-line numbers that flowed from third-party payers—meaning pharmaceutical companies or other payers—to NIH scientists.”
The first five years, from 2010 to 2014, constitute 40 percent of the total, he said.
“We now know that there are 1,675 scientists that received payments during that period, at least one payment. In fiscal year 2014, for instance, $36 million was paid out and that is on average $21,100 per scientist,” he said.
Collins received 14 payments while serving as NIH director, according to the information obtained by Open the Books. Dr. Anthony Fauci received 23 payments, and his deputy, Clifford Lane, got eight payments during the period.
Tabak conceded during a recent congressional hearing that the payments “have the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Republicans have since been vocal in demanding that NIH be more forthcoming about the royalty payments, while Democrats have been unusually quiet.
Open the Books received the data on the royalty payments only after suing in federal court, and even then, the information provided was heavily redacted so that the specific amounts of individual payments to recipients and the names of payers were concealed.
The GOP senators took note of that fact in their letter to Tabak.
“Each year, NIH awards tens of billions of dollars in the form of federal grants, and under 401.10 of the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments (Bayh–Dole) Act, federal agencies and employees may receive royalty payments for products and inventions when listed as an inventor or ‘co-inventor’ on a product’s patent,” the senators told Tabak.
“A 2020 study conducted by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) showed that, in total, 93 NIH patents contributed to 34 FDA-approved prescription drugs, generating roughly $2 billion in royalty payments to the agency between 1991-2019. In 2004 alone, some 900 NIH scientists earned approximately $8.9 million in royalties for drugs and inventions they discovered while working for the government.”
The senators said NIH has in the past been substantially more transparent about the payments.
“In 2005, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) implemented a policy requiring its employees to disclose these royalty payments on the consent forms for clinical trial participants; however, the agency has taken no action to disclose such payments to the public at large,” the letter states.
“In fact, even after the nonprofit organization Open the Books submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to disclose royalty payments made between 2009 and 2020, the agency only provided the names of the employees receiving the payments and the number of payments they received between 2009 and 2014; the amounts of the individual payments, the innovation in question, and the names of the third-party payers were redacted by NIH.”
Andrzejewski told The Epoch Times on May 31 that his nonprofit shouldn’t have had to take NIH to court to get the information the five senators are now demanding.
“The production of an estimated $350 million in third-party royalty payments to NIH and 1,700 of its scientists is so heavily redacted that it’s nearly impossible to follow the money. NIH is violating the spirit if not the letter of open records law,” Andrzejewski said.
“It shouldn’t take our lawsuit or congressional action to force NIH to comply with basic open government rules. We applaud the actions of the senators on the Homeland Security committee as they remind these unelected career bureaucrats that they work on behalf of the American people.”
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky warned that Pfizer’s COVID-19 pill Paxlovid can lead to a rebound in symptoms.
“If you take Paxlovid, you might get symptoms again,” Walensky told CBS News on Tuesday. “We haven’t yet seen anybody who has returned with symptoms needing to go to the hospital. So, generally, a milder course.”
Another researcher who is not affiliated with the CDC said that he has observed such a scenario.
“People who experience rebound are at risk of transmitting to other people, even though they’re outside what people accept as the usual window for being able to transmit,” Dr. Michael Charness of the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Boston told CNN on Tuesday.
After a patient recovers from COVID-19, the aforementioned rebound has occurred between two and eight days later, according to the CDC. The agency, however, told CBS that the benefits of taking Paxlovid outweigh the risks of COVID-19, namely among those who are at a high risk of developing severe symptoms from the virus.
A Pfizer technician handles the company’s COVID-19 pill, known as Paxlovid, in a file photograph. (Pfizer via AP)
About a week ago, the agency issued an alert to health care providers about the rebound, saying that patients who took Paxlovid either test positive for the virus after having tested negative or will experience COVID-19 symptoms.
“A brief return of symptoms may be part of the natural history of SARS-CoV-2 infection in some persons, independent of treatment with Paxlovid and regardless of vaccination status,” the federal health agency said at the time. SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19.
“Limited information currently available from case reports suggests that persons treated with Paxlovid who experience COVID-19 rebound have had mild illness; there are no reports of severe disease. There is currently no evidence that additional treatment is needed with Paxlovid or other anti-SARS-CoV-2 therapies in cases where COVID-19 rebound is suspected,” the CDC added.
The Epoch Times has contacted Pfizer for comment. Pfizer told CBS that it is observing a rebound rate of approximately 2 percent and is continuing to monitor patients.
“We have not seen any [COVID-19] resistance emerge to date in patients treated with Paxlovid,” a spokesperson for the company told Reuters this week.
In recent weeks, doctors have increasingly prescribed Paxlovid, which has been authorized to treat at-risk people. But some health care workers told Reuters they are putting off prescribing the medication.
“I am shying away from giving it to people who are very low- risk, and are not terribly ill, particularly people who are vaccinated and boosted,” said Dr. Bruce Farber, chief of public health and epidemiology for Northwell Health, in an interview with the news agency. He will still prescribe the pill to people who have significant health conditions or are aged 75 and older.
Our country is currently facing a great threat. A new enemy has emerged from the shadows that seeks to destroy and intimidate their way to a transformed state, and country, that you and I would hardly recognize.
This enemy is the radical vigilante woke mob that will steamroll anything and anyone in their way. Their blatant attacks on the American way of life are clear and intensifying: stifling dissent, public shaming, rampant violence, and a perverted version of history.
A group that will, literally, tear down monuments and buildings but — perhaps in an even more sinister way — tear down the American spirit itself. They go after the family unit, parental rights, traditional moral values, the church, and fact-based education.
Over the past few years, we’ve watched horrified as this group has attempted to brainwash our children into thinking we live in an evil, racist, irredeemable country.
We listened to them deny science and data to exert political theater all the while trampling over personal liberties enshrined in the Constitution.
We saw them take to the streets for an entire summer like outlaws burning, looting, and destroying everything in sight while being told they were “mostly peaceful” and “passionate.”
We watched Big Tech moguls in Silicon Valley be the arbiters of truth – deciding who gets to speak and who gets silenced through the digital public square.
We listened to the legacy media muffle legitimately verifiable news stories that didn’t align with their preferred narrative, only to watch the truth trickle out months later at a more politically expedient time.
Well, friend, the time for listening and watching from the sidelines is over.
This enemy has taken over media, educational institutions, corporate boards, professional sports, foundations, and professional institutions. They have left no corner of our lives untouched. But all hope is not lost.
We The People still have a say. We know the truth, you and I, about America and the country she is and can be. We must fight to defeat these false pretenses and predetermined narratives.
I am choosing to counter this enemy with faith, with reason, and with freedom. As Governor of the Free State of Florida, I have chosen to lead with a vision that builds America up rather than tears it down.
Together we can ensure that our children are raised to know they live in the greatest state in the nation, the greatest country in the world and that they have an opportunity to continue making them even greater.
Billionaire Bill Gates has predicted a 50 percent chance that another pandemic will occur in the next 20 years due to “climate change.”
Gates made his predictions in an interview with Spanish publication elDiario.es, during a one-day trip he made to Spain on May 26.
“The human population is growing, and we are invading more and more ecosystems. That is why I calculate that there is a 50 percent chance that we will have a pandemic of natural origin in the next 20 years, as a consequence of climate change,” Gates said, noting that the pandemic could be a type of coronavirus, a type of flu, or “something else.”
“It could be a virus made by man, by a bioterrorist who designed it and intentionally circulated it. That is a very scary scenario because they could try to spread it in different places at once,” he said.
Gates suggested that “greater investment” was needed in international anti-virus efforts with an expansion of the World Health Organization (WHO).
“What I am proposing would require a 25 percent increase in the WHO budget, and with that, we would have a team of about 3,000 people with different profiles. I call it the Global Epidemic Response and Mobilization (GERM) Team,” Gates said.
The former richest person in the world heads the organization that puts the most amount of private funds into global health issues, The Gates Foundation. The foundation spent $1.79 billion on global health initiatives in 2020 and financed about 10 percent of WHO’s operating costs in 2020-21.
Gates’ comments echoed his proposal in his book, “How to Prevent the Next Pandemic,” published in April. He proposed annual funding of $1 billion to operate GERM as a global surveillance pact to monitor pandemic threats.
Monkeypox ‘Evolving Rapidly’
Gates’ call for WHO expansion comes amid pending amendments to the WHO governing regulations that would give Director-General Tedros Adhanom unilateral powers to declare a public health emergency in any country in the world.
Meanwhile, the WHO issued a statement saying the situation with monkeypox is “evolving rapidly,” and more cases are expected to be identified “as surveillance expands.” A spokesperson from the WHO said the agency is not concerned about a global pandemic at the moment.
“The situation is evolving rapidly and WHO expects that there will be more [monkeypox] cases identified as surveillance expands in non-endemic countries, as well as in countries known to be endemic who have not recently been reporting cases,” the WHO stated on May 29, noting that the virus has been reported at 23 non-endemic countries.
A treatment room at a monkeypox quarantine area in Zomea Kaka, in the Central African Republic, on Oct. 18, 2018. (Charles Bouessel/AFP via Getty Images)
This was not the first time that Gates has predicted a global pandemic, however.
In 2015, Gates said that a pandemic was most likely a potential cause of mass death compared to a war.
“If anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it’s most likely to be a highly infectious virus rather than a war,” Gates said in a Ted Talk in 2015.
And again, since 2021, Gates has been speaking about using “germ games” to practice monitoring and responding to the smallpox virus.
“It’ll take probably about $1 billion a year for a pandemic Task Force at the WHO level, which is doing the surveillance and actually doing what I call ‘germ games’ where you practice,” Gates said in 2021 in an interview with think tank Policy Exchange. “You say, OK, what if a bioterrorist brought smallpox to 10 airports? You know, how would the world respond to that?”
Later in 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) partnered with the Munich Security Conference to conduct a simulation exercise similar to what Gates described. The NTI simulated that the monkeypox virus was to appear in May this year.
“By the end of the exercise, the fictional pandemic resulted in more than 3 billion cases and 270 million fatalities worldwide,” the NTI reported.
Changes to the United Nations’ 2005 international health regulations (IHR) have been occurring “under the radar” because Americans would object to the unconstitutionality of the changes, according to Jonathan Alexandre, a senior counsel for international litigation nonprofit Liberty Counsel.
The Biden administration’s proposed amendments to the IHR would further strengthen the World Health Organization’s authority to declare public health emergencies and override U.S. governing bodies.
“They’ve done this undercover because they knew at any point, if you were to tell Americans you’re ceding the authority to an international body that is unaccountable to the people, if the media, were to echo that message, certainly Americans would have no regard for this,” Alexandre said during a recent interview with “NTD News Today.” “And we ought not to have any regard for this international body [the WHO] that is not accountable to us.”
The Biden administration proposed 13 amendments to the IHR, that, if approved, would alter international public health rules—including expanding the powers given to the WHO director-general to declare a public health emergency, bypassing U.S. governmental bodies.
Loyce Pace, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services assistant secretary for global affairs, defended the amendments in January during remarks given virtually to the 150th Session of the Executive Board at the WHO in Geneva about pandemic preparedness.
“The United States led an inclusive and transparent process to develop this decision, as we are mindful that updating and modernizing the IHR are critical to ensuring the world is better prepared for and can respond to the next pandemic,” Pace said.
HHS officials didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for further comment.
Alexandre said the 13 amendments submitted by the administration are shameful and dangerous.
“The shameful part is that it’s coming from our president, the fact that Joe Biden has proposed these 13 amendments.
“The danger in it is that it’s ceding control over to this government entity that is not the United States, and the unconstitutional part is that they don’t abide by any of our Bill of Rights, any of the freedoms that we’ve committed ourselves to,” he said. The WHO is “an unelected body that is determined for whatever cause is necessary to basically put the world on a chokehold, have it follow its dictates, depending on what threat or pandemic it deems at the moment to be necessary in order to lock down the entire world.”
The Biden administration in past statements has denied that the IHR amendments would weaken U.S. sovereignty.
While Biden administration officials say they support a separate document, which some are calling a pandemic treaty, they are also advocating for amendments to the IHR as a faster way of overcoming the “weaknesses in global health security.”
“Immediate steps” could be taken by changing the IHR to improve certain areas, “particularly around early warning systems, coordinating the response, and information sharing,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra wrote in an opinion piece published in the Journal of the American Medical Association on Aug. 31, 2021.
Alexandre said these amendments give the WHO, and specifically its director-general, the power to bypass “any governmental authority within the United States, … any accountability that these people have to elected individuals, [and] any authority that is seated from the Constitution.”
Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes of Health agency was funding research to identify treatments for monkeypox shortly before the virus began spreading in a global outbreak.
Fauci’s agency, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has previously come under scrutiny for funding bat coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which many public health experts and intelligence officials believe to be the source of COVID-19.
NIAID has also funded research into potential cures for monkeypox, shortly before the viral disease began spreading in a global outbreak. The curious timing of the NIAID grant comes amidst pharmaceutical giants including Pfizer and Johson & Johnson making record-level profits due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The grant supports a “randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the safety and efficacy of tecovirimat for the treatment of patients with monkeypox virus disease.”
“The funding supports a clinical trial to identify effective treatments for monkeypox virus disease,” explains a summary of the research, which, despite beginning in September 2020, has not generated any publicly available studies, papers, or patents.
NIAID GRANT.
“The similarity between monkeypox and the variola virus, coupled with concerns about the potential of the variola virus as a potential bioterrorism agent, have placed monkeypox treatments at the forefront of public health and scientific research agendas in many countries,” adds the grant summary.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant database shows that $9,824,009 was sent to Leidos Biomedical Research, which partners with the NIH’s National Cancer Institute (NCI) to operate Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, in 2021.
The grant, which is set to conclude on September 27th, 2025, was distributed to Lori Dodd, who serves as a Mathematical Statistician in the Biostatistics Research Branch of the NIAID.
Dodd was previously exposed for her involvement in the NIAID’s efforts to cover up the agency reportedly altering the endpoint in a trial testing the effects of remdesivir against COVID-19 to make it look more effective.
The grant follows The National Pulse unearthing the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s recent research assembling strains of the monkeypox virus to be able to conduct PCR tests.
U.S.-proposed amendments to the international health regulations which govern response to pandemics and the new global pandemic treaty, both on the agenda of the World Health Organization’s general meeting, pose a threat to countries’ sovereignty, said journalist and author Nick Corbishley.
The amendments proposed in January by the Biden administration will give the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) unilateral authority to declare a public health emergency in any nation based on whatever evidence the director chooses.
The 13 amendments put forward by the Biden administration were on the agenda of the 75th World Health Assembly held last week in Geneva, Switzerland. The World Health Assembly is the decision-making body of the WHO and is attended by delegations from all member states, according to the organization’s website.
Nick Corbishley. (Crossroads/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
The assembly also started deliberation on what the newly proposed global pandemic treaty might include.
The global pandemic treaty is a parallel mechanism of the WHO. It will have force under international law and is very similar to the International Health Regulations’ amendments, but it will give far more power to the WHO and its director-general, Bell said.
Corbishley believes that the assembly will focus more on compliance of WHO member states with regulations adopted by the organization. The Biden administration mentioned setting up a compliance committee that will ensure that WHO participants follow its regulations, Corbishley told EpochTV’s “Crossroads” program.
Currently, the WHO “only has an advisory role. It’s only able to make recommendations to member states and it is up to the participating nations to decide whether and how they implement those recommendations,” Corbishley explained. “That is likely to change if there is a global pandemic treaty. ”
He pointed out that the concept of a compliance committee if implemented, will be “almost like to police the actions of each member state.
“The countries that are most at risk of losing the most sovereignty in this sort of scenario are likely to be poorer, smaller countries.”
Similar cases have been observed within the last 15 to 20 years in the World Trade Organization, where global corporations can sue national governments in an international court for infringing on their profits or even threatening their future profits, Corbishley said. “It hits poor countries, smaller countries much more because they don’t have the money to be able to pay off these kinds of lawsuits.”
“They don’t have the diplomatic clout on an international level to be able to resist these things.”
Impact of Global Pandemic Treaty
Protestors against the WHO pandemic treaty gather outside the UN building in Manhattan, New York, on May 24, 2022. (Enrico Trigoso/The Epoch Times)
Every country that signs on to the pandemic treaty instituted by WHO will lose some degree of sovereignty, but it is hard to tell to what extent because the treaty is at the beginning of its development, Corbishley said.
“If [the WHO] does gain the power to declare a public health international emergency in a country without even consulting or reaching an agreement with the state in question, then that is a massive shift in the power balance between states and a supranational organization like the World Health Organization,” Corbishley said.
If the treaty can enforce a certain amount of compliance on states in the area of public health policy, a new trend of the “balkanization of globalization” could begin, Corbishley noted. “Globalization is beginning to look a lot more fragile than it did five to 10 years ago.”
For example, Russia, which has a large population and a reasonably large economy, recently floated the idea of withdrawing from WHO, he said. Although Corbishley doubts that the United States or the European Union will oppose the treaty, if some other big countries start expressing their concerns that the treaty is not in their interest, “then it could become impractical as a document,” he pointed out.
An initial working document toward this global pandemic treaty is called the zero draft report and it was also on the agenda of the last World Health Assembly, Bell said. The treaty is supposed to be discussed and agreed at the World Health Assembly that will convene next year and would then come into force upon ratification by the participating countries, he added.
To adopt the treaty, two-thirds of WHO members have to agree, while amending the existing international health regulations requires approval by only half of the participating countries, Bell said.
There are no clear proposals for the global pandemic treaty because the work on the draft has just started, Corbishley said, adding that some draft documents could be available in August.
Private Funding of WHO
Corbishley emphasized the issue of the private funding of the WHO, which in his view leads to the semi-privatization of global health. This trend is consistent with the strategic partnership agreement between the World Economic Forum and the United Nations, which represents the semi-privatization of certain global policies including health.
The WHO is influenced by the countries which comprise its assembly and by the private and corporate donors who fund a lot of its programs, Bell said. “So it responds to those who directed.”
“It certainly is pushing a very new way of managing health and of managing decision making in health, particularly in outbreaks, that is clearly to the advantage of these donors of WHO,” Bell explained.
He also noted that there is a possibility that countries would take advantage of this whole situation to further their strategic interests over the interests of rival countries. “The world is a diverse place. Not all countries agree with each other.”
About 80 percent of funding for the WHO, comprised of 194 member states, comes from private companies and private foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—the second largest overall contributor after Germany. The United States is the third-largest contributor.
Germany, the top donor to WHO, is also the biggest exporter of pharmaceutical products in the world, Corbishley pointed out. Moreover, the WHO has a contract with T-Systems, a subsidiary of German company Deutsche Telekom AG, to build a global interoperable system of vaccination passports, according to a company statement.
Considering “how pharmaceutical companies have managed to capture—to a certain extent or to a great extent—our governments and regulatory bodies and academia,” it begs the question: “to what extent [is the WHO] reflecting the interests of the global public, and to what extent do they represents the interests of the pharmaceutical companies that whether directly or indirectly through their the member states are funding the WHO,” Corbishley said.
He also encourages people on the left or the center of the political spectrum to pay more attention to the amount of private funding the WHO receives. Right now it seems people on the right are deeply concerned about how giving more powers to the WHO might pose a threat to sovereignty, Corbishley noted.
Jan Jekielek and Mark Tapscott contributed to this report.
Don’t believe what you’re being told by the propaganda machine. Facts don’t lie, and it’s now clear that COVID vaccination makes it more likely you’ll die if you are 60 years old or younger, not less likely. Here’s why.
Story at-a-glance
According to a recent modeling experiment, “Increased contact among vaccinated people can give the false impression that COVID-19 vaccines are not working”
This rationale is dubious at best, considering the unvaccinated have continuously been accused of not taking COVID seriously and going about their lives as normal, while the “vaccinated” are, by and large, more fearful and take “authorities” advice to heart, which includes avoiding large gatherings and close one-on-one interactions without wearing a face mask
Many data sources reveal that COVID-jabbed individuals are now getting COVID-19 at far higher rates than the unjabbed. Death rates, both for COVID and other causes, have also risen in tandem with the number of shots administered
According to an analysis of U.S. data, in September 2021, when Delta was most prominent, 23% of those who died from COVID had received the jab. In January and February 2022, when Omicron started dominating, that percentage jumped to 42%
Many argue that Omicron was more contagious than Delta, hence the higher death toll. But Omicron was also far milder than Delta, and there’s no reason the jabbed would die at a higher rate from a less lethal variant than a more lethal one, unless the injection made the infection worse
A preprint study found adult participants in Moderna’s trial who got the real injection and later got a breakthrough infection did not generate antibodies against the nucleocapsid — a key component of the virus — as frequently as did those in the placebo arm. Their anti-nucleocapsid response was also lower regardless of the viral load. As a result of this reduced antibody response, those who got the jab may be more prone to repeated COVID infections
Well, the COVID jab pushers have had to resort to all sorts of obfuscation to hide the fact that the injections don’t work, and now they’re really scraping the bottom of the barrel of excuses. According to a recent Reuters report,1 “Increased contact among vaccinated people can give the false impression that COVID-19 vaccines are not working.”
This irrational explanation has been levied in response to studies showing COVID-jabbed individuals are getting infected at higher rates than the unjabbed, and there are many such studies.
“These studies are likely to involve statistical errors, particularly if they did not account for different contact patterns among vaccinated versus unvaccinated people,” Korryn Bodner, a research associate in infectious disease modeling in Toronto, told Reuters. Bodner is the first author of a preprint study2 posted on medRxiv at the end of April 2022.
Are the Jabbed More Carefree Than the Unvaxxed?
Bodner’s claim is that those who got the jab may be more likely to throw caution to the wind and mingle with others, hence getting infected more frequently, while the unjabbed may be more cautious because they know they’re vulnerable. This rationale is dubious at best, considering:
a) The unvaccinated have continuously been accused of not taking COVID seriously and going about their lives as normal
b) Those who have taken the jab are, by and large, a far more fearful lot; they tend to listen to the “authorities” and take all of their advice to heart, which would include avoiding large gatherings and close one-on-one interactions without wearing a face mask
Check out the following story, reported by Anchorage Daily News:3
“Arianne Bennett recalled her husband, Scott Bennett, saying, ‘But I’m vaxxed. But I’m vaxxed,’ from the Washington hospital bed where he struggled to fight off COVID-19 this winter … Bennett went to get his booster in early December after returning to Washington from a lodge he owned in the Poconos, where he and his wife hunkered down for fall.
Just a few days after his shot, Bennett began experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, meaning he was probably exposed before the extra dose of immunity could kick in. His wife suspects he was infected at a dinner where he and his server were unmasked at times …
‘He was absolutely shocked. He did not expect to be sick. He really thought he was safe,’ Arianne Bennett recalled. ‘And I’m like, ‘But baby, you’ve got to wear the mask all the time. All the time. Up over your nose.’”
Within days of his third dose, he got a serious case of COVID. Yet they blame it on hypothetical exposure to an apparently healthy food server. This kind of irrational reasoning is prevalent among those who got the jabs and who keep going back for more as they are part of the 30% of the population that have been completely brainwashed.
To reiterate what I’ve explained since 2020, asymptomatic spread is likely to be so rare as to be nonexistent.4 It was a lie perpetuated to drive up fear and prop up rising “case” rates that didn’t really exist. It’s basic virology that you cannot transmit a virus unless you have a “hot” infection, and if you have an active, transmissible infection, you have symptoms. The symptoms are a sign that your body’s defenses are kicking in to rid itself of the live virus.
No symptoms, no transmission. So, unless the server was feeling sick and went to work anyway, the simplest explanation for Bennett’s demise was the shot itself. And if the server was sick, the fact that Bennett got so ill suggests the shot is ineffective, even at two doses.
The pro-pharma shills want you to believe there are so many confounding variables, we can’t possibly draw any conclusions from data showing the shots don’t work. Yet looking at data from a wide spectrum of sources, all show the same alarming trends. What “confounding factor” could possibly account for ALL of them being misinterpreted?
An Unproven Hypothesis
Reuters5 does note that Bodner’s simulations “do not prove that this type of bias affected studies of vaccine effectiveness versus the Omicron variant.” What it does show, according to Bodner, is that “even if vaccines work, increased contact among vaccinated persons can lead to the appearance of the vaccine not working.”
In other words, this is a hypothesis that has yet to be proven. Her modeling suggests it COULD make the jabs appear ineffective IF those who got the jab actually behave very differently from the unjabbed.
But again, it’s highly unlikely that the unvaccinated are avoiding exposure by steering clear of close contacts and crowds to a greater degree than those who got the jab. It’s far more reasonable to suspect that the shots don’t work.
On a side note, Bodner’s study was funded by the Canada COVID-19 Immunity Task Force.6 This task force is housed at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and McGill University is a long-term recipient of grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.7,8,9,10
What Do the Data Say About COVID Jab Effectiveness?
Based on data from around the world, it seems clear that the COVID gene transfer injections are not working. In fact, they’re having the opposite effect of what you’d expect from a real vaccine. According to a Washington Post analysis of state and federal data,11 in September 2021, when Delta was most prominent, 23% of those who died from COVID in the U.S. had received the jab.
In January and February 2022, when Omicron started dominating, that percentage jumped to 42%. In December 2021 and January 2022, just under half of all the COVID patients in intensive care at Kaiser Permanente’s hospital system in Northern California had also received one or more shots.12
Many argue that Omicron was more contagious than Delta, hence the higher death toll. But Omicron was also far milder than Delta, so why would the jabbed die at a higher rate from a less lethal variant than a more lethal one?
One attempt at an explanation is that the fatalities are now occurring primarily among the elderly. Nearly two-thirds of those who died from COVID during the Omicron wave were 75 and older. During the Delta wave, 75-year-olds and older accounted for just one-third of the deaths.13
But that was the case from the beginning, and it still doesn’t answer the question: Why would old people be more likely to die from a milder virus than a more serious one? To answer that question, the injection pushers revert back to the argument of waning potency. Two-thirds of those who died in January and February 2022 did not have a booster shot. According to Anchorage Daily News:14
“Experts say the rising number of vaccinated people dying should not cause panic in those who got shots, the vast majority of whom will survive infections. Instead, they say, these deaths serve as a reminder that vaccines are not foolproof and that those in high-risk groups should consider getting boosted and taking extra precautions during surges.”
So, in other words, the jab only works for a handful of months, and then you have to take another. And another. And another. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,15 the first two doses wear off after five months, necessitating a third dose, and the third dose wears off in just four months, at which time you’re supposed to get dose No. 4.
Israeli data16 show the effectiveness of shot No. 4 in preventing severe disease declines by 56% in just seven weeks. So, it appears the protection you get from the shots keeps getting shorter with each dose. Meanwhile, data show the shots can render you increasingly susceptible to all manner of infection and disease, through a wide variety of mechanisms.
Moderna Trial Data Reveal Repeated Infections Are Likely
Among such data is a preprint study17 posted on medRxiv April 19, 2022, which found adult participants in Moderna’s COVID jab trial who got the real injection, and later got a breakthrough infection, did not generate antibodies against the nucleocapsid — a key component of the virus — as frequently as did those in the placebo arm.
Curiously, placebo recipients produced anti-nucleocapsid antibodies twice as often as those who got the Moderna shot, and their anti-nucleocapsid response was larger regardless of the viral load. As a result of this reduced antibody response, those who got the jab may be more prone to repeated COVID infections. As reported by The Defender:18
“[T]he authors found that using the presence of anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) antibodies to determine whether a person was exposed to SARS-CoV-2 will miss some infections. Thus, the sensitivity of this kind of test, when applied to vaccinated individuals, is not ideal.
However, there are more important implications19,20 of these findings … Specifically, the study implies that the reduced ability of a vaccinated individual to produce antibodies to other portions of the virus may lead to a greater risk of future infections in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated.
It is important to note that this is not just another argument for the superiority of natural immunity. Rather, this is evidence suggesting that even after a vaccinated person has a breakthrough infection, that individual still does not acquire the same level of protection against subsequent exposures that an unvaccinated person acquires.
This is a troubling finding, and something investigators conducting the Moderna vaccine trial likely knew in 2020.”
UK Data Confirm Results
These findings are corroborated by data from the U.K. Health Security Agency. It publishes weekly COVID-19 vaccine surveillance data, including anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels. The report21 for Week 13, issued March 31, 2022, shows that COVID-jabbed individuals with breakthrough infections have lower levels of these antibodies — a finding they attributed to the protective benefit of the shot:
“These lower anti N responses in individuals with breakthrough infections (post-vaccination) compared to primary infections likely reflect the shorter and milder infections in these patients.”
However, this interpretation is likely flawed, because less severe infection is associated with lower viral load, and as the study above demonstrated, the “vaccinated” have lower anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels than the unvaccinated at all viral load levels, but especially so at the lowest viral loads. As noted by The Defender:22
“This is one of the most significant findings of the study because it overturns the heretofore unchallenged idea that decreased seroconversion in the vaccinated is due to less severe infection in this population — which is a benefit provided by the vaccine.
However, this new study shows that even at low viral loads, the unvaccinated are more likely to seroconvert than those who are vaccinated. In fact, the difference in seroconversion rates is the greatest at lowest viral loads. The decrease in conversion rates is not a result of a benefit from the vaccine. It is a consequence of it.”
Boosted Now Have Three to Four Times Higher Case Rates
The Defender also reviews other U.K. data showing the COVID case rate is three to four times higher among those who have received a booster shot, compared to the unvaccinated. This is true for all age groups with the exception of children under 18:23
“What could explain such a large increase in infection rates among the boosted? Interestingly, the authors … warn that the unvaccinated may have contracted COVID-19 prior to the observation period — in other words, they may have acquired natural immunity previously, giving them added protection …
But their own data tells the opposite story. The boosted are more likely to contract the disease — by a factor of 3 to 4. How do we know whether the larger infection rates in the boosted are due to more robust immunity in the unvaccinated because of prior infection or due to an immune deficiency in the boosted?
The question can be definitively answered by examining the trend of infection rates [using] … the equivalent table from two months earlier. There is still a greater infection rate among the boosted, but it is only two to three times higher. If the authors’ hypothesis was correct, the more recent data should have shown less of a difference, not more.
If anything, their data support the finding that the decreased seroconversion rates in the vaccinated may be causing a greater risk of repeated infections.”
Walgreens’ Data
Data from the pharmacy chain Walgreens in the U.S. also reveal the same trend — COVID-jabbed individuals are testing positive for COVID at higher rates than the unjabbed, and those who got their last shot five months or more ago have the highest risk.
As you can see in the screenshot from Walgreens’ COVID-19 tracker24 below, during the week of May 9 through 15, 2022, 21.4% of unvaccinated individuals who got tested for COVID got a positive result. Of those who had gotten just one COVID shot, the positivity rate was 26.3%.
Of those who received two doses five months or more ago, 31.3% tested positive, and of those who received a third dose five months or more ago, the positive rate was 32.7%. So, after the first booster shot (the third dose), people are at greatest risk of testing positive for COVID.
More Jabs, More COVID Deaths
Perhaps most disturbing of all are the data showing the COVID shots are raising mortality rates, both from COVID and other causes. Above is an animated illustration25 sourced from Our World In Data, first showing the vaccination rates of South America, North America, Europe and Africa, from mid-December 2020 through the third week of April 2022, followed by the cumulative confirmed COVID deaths per million in those countries during that same timeframe.
Africa has had a consistently low vaccination rate throughout, while North America, Europe and South America all have had rapidly rising vaccination rates. Africa has also had a consistently low COVID mortality rate, although a slight rise began around September 2021. Still, it’s nowhere near the COVID death rates of North America, South America and Europe, all of which saw dramatic increases.
Here’s another one,26 also sourced from Our World In Data, first showing the excess death rate in the U.S. (the cumulative number of deaths from all causes compared to projections based on previous years), between January 26, 2020, and January 30, 2022, followed by an illustration of the tandem rise of vaccine doses administered and the excess mortality rate. It clearly shows that as vaccination rates rose, so did excess mortality.
Risk-Benefit Analyses
We also have the benefit of more than one risk-benefit analysis, and all show that, with very few exceptions, the COVID jabs do more harm than good. A risk-benefit analysis27 by Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and independent researcher Kathy Dopp, published in mid-February 2022, concluded that the COVID jab is deadlier than COVID-19 itself for anyone under the age of 80.
Another analysis,28 which relied on data in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), concluded that in those under age 18, the shots only increase the risk of death from COVID, and there’s no point at which the shot can prevent a single COVID death, no matter how many are vaccinated.If you’re under 18, you’re 51 times more likely to die from the COVID jab than you are to die from COVID if not vaccinated.
If you’re under 18, you’re a shocking 51 times more likely to die from the jab than you are to die from COVID if not vaccinated. In the 18 to 29 age range, the shot will kill 16 for every person it saves from dying from COVID, and in the 30 to 39 age range, the expected number of vaccine fatalities to prevent a single COVID death is 15. Only when you get into the 60 and older categories do the risks between the jab and COVID infection even out.
A third risk-benefit analysis by researchers in Germany and The Netherlands was published in June 2021, in the journal Vaccines.29 The paper caused such an uproar, part of the editorial board resigned in protest.30 The journal retracted the paper, but after a thorough re-review, it was republished in the August 2021 issue of Science, Public Health Policy and the Law.31
These researchers concluded that, “as we vaccinate 100 000 persons, we might save five lives but risk two to four deaths.”32 A fourth, still preliminary, analysis — based on more than 1,700 death reports collected by Steve Kirsch — shows the shots do more harm than good in anyone under age 60. Kirsch writes:33
“Figure 1 below is an analysis of survey data I collected. The analysis shows that the vaccines are harmful to those under 60. The red dots higher than the error bar means more vaccinated people observed dead than expected based on the population of vaccinated to all people.
In other words, if we vaccinated 60% of people (middle of the grey bar) and 70% (red dot) of the deaths are vaccinated, we have a serious problem. The precautionary principle of medicine suggests if you are under 60 and thinking of taking a vaccine, you shouldn’t. These preliminary results are both statistically significant …
The conclusion is very clear: nobody under 60 years old should get the vaccine because there is no evidence of a benefit. In fact, if you are between 40-60, it’s clear that vaccination makes it more likely you’ll die, not less likely.”
Figure 1. Red dot below error bar = vax works. Red dot above error bar = vax likely causes harm. Red dot inside the error bar = Insufficient evidence to justify taking a new, unproven vaccine. Conclusion: Vaccine shouldn’t be considered unless there is a clear benefit. 60 and older seems to justify use based on the data we have so far. Limitations: we are waiting for others to confirm / challenge the analysis. See text34 for more info. Joel Smalley did the analysis.
While some analyses present a direr picture than others, taken together, it’s clear that there appears to be no long term benefits to the COVID jabs. We’re consistently ending up with a higher cost than can conceivably be considered reasonable. The pro-pharma side will likely continue to lob flimsy excuses at the data, but at some point, the truth will be so clear that even the blind will see it. Until that day, continue to inform yourself and share what you find.
Non-scientific speculation regarding monkeypox is being used by the World Health Organization (WHO) to “justify further human rights violations” with a rollout of new, experimental vaccines, claims the World Council for Health (WCH), an independent nonprofit initiative.
There is no rational scientific basis for vaccinating people for smallpox in order to prevent the spread of monkeypox, according to the Council in a statement released Friday. The organization said that old photos from CDC archives and Getty Images, used to circulate a notion regarding the disease, is “not representative of current international cases of monkeypox.”
WCH referenced a post by Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) International, a UK-based non-profit organization founded in 2002 by Robert Verkerk, in the statement.
“Whether monkeypox gathers momentum or dwindles, its timing is ideal to justify further support for global, centralized health governance orchestrated by the WHO through the International Health Regulations and the WHO ‘pandemic treaty,’” said Verkerk in the May 25 article.
Verkerk says that case definitions of monkeypox “are set up perfectly to mask” COVID-19 vaccine injury symptoms such as the increasing prevalence of shingles following the inoculation jab.
The WHO’s original descriptions of smallpox pustules, according to a document from 1973, differs from pictures circulated by the media at present, which signifies inconsistency, claims Verkerk.
While smallpox peaked around the 1950s, it was virtually eradicated in 1980 globally.
However, the WHO is gearing up for a worldwide rollout of next-generation smallpox vaccines that will likely be justified by “health authorities despite a lack of evidence of safety,” especially when it interacts with “genetic vaccines” like that of COVID, said Verkerk.
Monkeypox requires clinical diagnosis and a PCR test will have serious limitations and could “lead to many false-positive cases,” noted the WCH statement. The current case definition of a suspected monkeypox case also includes conditions found in COVID-19, the common cold, and shingles.
“The biggest threat to global health is the ongoing effort of the WHO and its private partners to vaccinate every man, woman, and child with new experimental vaccines and injections that have not been adequately tested,” from the WCH statement.
Based on data from the CDC, the United States has registered 12 cases of monkeypox as of May 27.
People who may carry symptoms of the disease must contact their health care provider, including those who have traveled to central or west African countries and parts of Europe where monkeypox cases have been reported, as well as men who regularly have close or intimate contact with other men.
There is no specific treatment approved for monkeypox virus infections at present, according to the CDC, and prognosis for infected individuals depends on multiple factors like “previous vaccination status, initial health status, concurrent illnesses, and comorbidities.”
Military service demands sacrifice. Members must accept time away from family, discomfort during training and active duty, and they must have a willingness to give their all; lay down their life.
But since 2021, military members who refused to take the COVID-19 shot for religious reasons have been told that they must also sacrifice either their faith or their career, discharge reputation, and any future benefits they may have been banking on.
In the waning days of the pandemic, all branches of the U.S. military are still denying religious exemptions that would allow those who object to the shots for religious reasons to continue to serve. More than 24,000 service members have filed a Religious Accommodation Request and have been denied, according to the Liberty Counsel, which is pushing forward with a class certification for a lawsuit that will include members of all six military branches, including the Space Force.
There are at least nine suits across the nation attempting to help the unvaccinated faithful keep their jobs.
“It is abusive. It is inhumane. It is an intentional purge of people of faith from the military by the Biden administration,” Mat Staver, attorney and chairman of the Liberty Counsel, told The Epoch Times. He notes numerous ways the military has relaxed its COVID mitigation, such as housing Marines at the Parris Island barracks who are COVID negative and COVID positive together. “We know across the board that you’re having various platoons that are being dismantled and are not being rebuilt because they don’t have people to staff. We know that recruitment is down. People are not coming into the military because the morale is at an all-time low. So that’s why I say in light of all of this, why are [there] still mandates?”
In response to the Jan. 6, 2021 rally at the U.S. Capitol that has been characterized as an insurrection of extremists, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, in February 2021, directed military leaders to address extremism within the troops. Austin’s office did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
“He wanted to purge the military. He was referring to people like those coming out of Jan. 6, but I think his definition is broader than that,” Staver said. He believes people of faith are also being targeted.
It has caused some military members to reevaluate who the enemy is.
“We’ve had high ranking people tell us, ‘We were prepared to fight the enemy. We were not prepared to fight our own government over this issue of religious exemptions.’”
Staver says those seeking religious exemption from the shot are facing immense pressure.
One client, a one-star brigadier general who has served more than 20 years, wasn’t ready to retire, but she could. She doesn’t want the shot for religious reasons. Instead of letting her retire with honor now, she must first take the shot. No shot would mean dishonorable discharge and a loss of benefits.
“We have people that are deployed in Korea or Japan,” Staver said. “We have many of these stories. One was sent to Korea for a year on a company deployment. He was supposed to come home in December of 2021. But because he asked for a religious exemption, they’ve frozen him in Korea. They won’t let him come back to see his wife and his 10-month-old son.” He’s never seen his son who was born while he served far from home. “His wife is very distraught. He tells us there’s no end in sight for him to be able to come home. They’re saying, ‘You’re not going to be able to leave and go home until you take the shot.’ And they’re doing that all over the world. I can tell you story after story after story.”
Staver knows of unvaccinated people who are kicked out of the barracks. They are not getting reimbursed for housing. Some are living in their cars.
And he tells of the military moving people’s belongings to the opposite coast as they were being redeployed to a different part of the country. Their furniture and other belongings end up frozen in the wrong place.
“This is the kind of pressure that they’re applying,” Staver said. “What the chaplains continue to say is they’ve never seen this kind of abuse and mistreatment of service members.”
He says morale is at an all-time low, and many who have spent their life serving have told him they would no longer recommend a military career to young people.
“At a time when we need the military at its strongest, Biden has weakened it. People who have been around for 18, 20, 25 years—you can’t replace those people very easily. Some of them are just irreplaceable. And they’re willing to kick them out.”
While the decision to decline the shot is personal, those who are asking for exemptions from the shot want Americans to understand their fight is a matter of liberty for all.
“These guys are metaphorically in a trench fighting to preserve the freedoms of being able to live out our convictions,” Megan, an Air Force wife at Offutt Air Force Base near Omaha, Nebraska, told The Epoch Times. Her last name is being withheld as they are trying to keep her husband’s job. “These guys want to live out their convictions and still be able to do their job. Why is it a mutually exclusive thing? You can no longer serve God and your country? How did this happen? How did we get here?”
The Small Business Administration (SBA) had no plan to address fraud in its nearly trillion-dollar Paycheck Protection Program, according to the agency’s inspector general.
The SBA “did not have an organizational structure” to handle potential fraud for the PPP program, which allowed businesses to receive forgivable loans from the federal government if they kept their staff amid the pandemic, according to Inspector General Hannibal Ware. The report, published Thursday, details how the agency altered its loan review process over time but was still unable to establish defined roles on how to counter fraud.
“The agency did not establish a centralized entity to design, lead, and manage fraud risk,” the report states.
PPP was established in March 2020 as a part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act. Former president Donald Trump extended the program until May 2021. Borrowers submitted applications for PPP through the Small Business Administration, which then delegated approval and distribution to its certified lenders across the country. The loans totaled $799.8 billion to roughly 5,500 private lenders, according to the report. But experts say as much as $80 billion may be fraudulent loans.
“It is the biggest fraud in a generation,” Matthew Schneider, a former U.S. attorney, told NBC News.
The report comes amid historic inflation levels, which experts attribute at least in part to trillions in government spending amid the pandemic, including the PPP program. The Small Business Administration, however, omitted any mention of inflation from its proposed budget for 2023, the Washington Free Beaconreported earlier this month.
The exact amount of fraud is unknown, but the Department of Justice has prosecuted several PPP fraudsters, including a man who submitted false applications to steal $27 million. Labor unions also raked in at least $37 million in forgivable loans they were ineligible to receive, the Free Beacon reported.
Republicans on the House Committee on Small Business have in recent months sent a series of letters to SBA administrator Isabella Guzman demanding answers on how the agency is addressing PPP fraud. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R., Mo.), the committee’s ranking member, said the inspector general’s report confirmed his fears about the agency’s incompetence.
“It is clear to me the SBA under President Biden has failed to protect these federal dollars thus hurting both the American taxpayer and our struggling small businesses across the country,” Luetkemeyer told the Free Beacon. “The SBA clearly cannot manage this critical task.”
Joe Biden’s Chief Climate Officer and Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development was a fellow at the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, founded by World Economic Forum Chairman Klaus Schwab.
The prominent position of the Biden Appointee, Gillian Caldwell, gives her considerable direction over the White House’s energy and climate change policy, which the World Economic Forum (WEF) has highlighted as an integral component of its “Great Reset” agenda. In addition to exploiting COVID-19, the WEF has been accused of using issues like the environment to advance its radical agenda of abolishing private property ownership.
Caldwell was a Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship Fellow in 2001, which earned her “all expenses paid participation at the World Economic Forum in Davos annually,” according to her resume. The Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship was founded by WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab in 1998 and is run by his wife, Hilde.
While attending several WEF events, Caldwell has been a featured blogger for the group, which she reveals on her resume:
“The Schwab Foundation brings several dozen of us here each year as the primary vehicle through which is aims to support our work.”
“Day 1 at the World Economic Forum. I attended a session this morning on how we did as a global community in the last year in the areas identified as top priorities by Davos attendees last year: poverty, equitable globalization, climate change, education, global governance, and the Middle East,” she reported
Prior to joining the Biden White House, Caldwell worked as a consultant for clients including the shady far-left campaign slush fund Arabella Advisors, which has deep ties to George Soros. She was also a Strategy Consultant for the Robin Hood Foundation, which has received millions of dollars from Soros.
“Gillian serves as the Chief Climate Officer and is responsible for directing and overseeing all climate and environment work across the agency. She also serves as Deputy Assistant Administrator, overseeing DDI’s Center for Environment, Energy, and Infrastructure and the Office of Environmental and Social Risk Management,” explains her professional bio on USAID’s website.
The USAID has previously funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, believed by many to be the source of COVID-19.
THE BOMBSHELL CLAIMS WILL OPEN A NEW AVENUE OF INQUIRY INTO THE PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSE TO THE COVID PANDEMIC.
Mask mandates caused higher COVID-19 death rates, according to the bombshell claims made in a new medical journal report analyzing fatality rates across the state of Kansas.
The observational study – “The Foegen Effect: A Mechanism by Which Facemasks Contribute to the COVID-19 Case Fatality Rate” – was published in Medicine in February 2022, authored by German doctor Zacharias Fögen.
The paper analyzed “whether mandatory mask use influenced the case fatality rate in Kansas” during the time period of August 1st, 2020 to October 15th. Kansas was used for comparison because the state allowed each of its 105 counties to decide whether or not to implement mask mandates, with 81 counties deciding against the measure.
“The most important finding from this study is that contrary to the accepted thought that fewer people are dying because infection rates are reduced by masks, this was not the case,” summarized the paper.
“Results from this study strongly suggest that mask mandates actually caused about 1.5 times the number of deaths or ∼50% more deaths compared to no mask mandates.”
The study also posited a potential reason for the disparity in risk ratio (RR) for dying from COVID-19:
“A rationale for the increased RR by mandating masks is probably that virions that enter or those coughed out in droplets are retained in the facemask tissue, and after quick evaporation of the droplets, hypercondensed droplets or pure virions (virions not inside a droplet) are re-inhaled from a very short distance during inspiration.”
Dubbed the “Foegen effect,” the theory suggests that COVID-19 “virions spread (because of their smaller size) deeper into the respiratory tract.”
“They bypass the bronchi and are inhaled deep into the alveoli, where they can cause pneumonia instead of bronchitis, which would be typical of a virus infection.”
“These findings suggest that mask use might pose a yet unknown threat to the user instead of protecting them, making mask mandates a debatable epidemiologic intervention,” concludes the paper.
The study follows another recently published analysis of international data showing the same relationship between COVID-19 and masks.
With the end of the academic year in sight, an overwhelming number of educators are planning to close the book on their teaching careers.
Much of this stems from post-pandemic classroom behavioral challenges with students and ongoing staff shortages that create excessive workloads for teachers.
Many educators who have 25 years or more under their belt are opting to retire, but even less seasoned ones are walking away and choosing different career paths.
Back in February, the National Education Association (NEA) released a study conducted by GBAO Strategies that revealed a startling 55 percent of teachers planned to leave their profession ahead of schedule.
The NEA is the most prominent teachers union in the United States and represents 3 million educators.
Widespread educator shortages pre-date the arrival of COVID-19, but the pandemic also served as the last straw for many, kicking off the trend of an early departure.
A RAND study from January 2021 showed nearly a quarter of those surveyed expressed the desire to quit after just one year of teaching during the pandemic.
Students and parents arrive masked for the first day of the school year at Grant Elementary School in Los Angeles, California, on Aug. 16, 2021. (Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images)
The average national turnover rate was only 16 percent before COVID-19. However, in 2021, that number jumped to 25 percent.
This year, 80 percent of NEA members reported that unfilled job openings at schools have led to more work obligations for the educators who’ve chosen to stay in their profession.
“I think people are leaving because it’s all too much. It’s a firestorm. It’s all eroding,” Heidi Rickard told The Epoch Times.
Rickard has been an educator since 1999. After spending some time teaching in Colorado Springs, she put down roots in the Alameda Unified school district in the San Francisco bay area.
She explained that many veteran teachers “just can’t take it” anymore and are leaving due, in part, to the scale of mental health challenges students brought back to the classroom after two years of online learning.
“As a veteran teacher, when the best of my best isn’t working, that’s so defeating,” Rickard said.
Two years of excessive screen time at home and the disengagement of online learning have left students struggling, falling behind, and adrift in a sea of depression.
COVID-19 and its subsequent restrictions created a mental health crisis for youth, which is now manifesting as aggressive or excessively troublesome behavior in the classroom.
In October 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the Children’s Hospital Association acknowledged the pandemic-fueled decline in child and adolescent mental health had become a national emergency.
Students walk to their classrooms at a public middle school in Los Angeles, Calif., on Sept. 10, 2021. (Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images)
And the dire shortage of counselors in school districts to assist students has added to this.
Rickard noted, “We haven’t had a counselor all year. Nobody even applied.”
Findings from a joint study on the role of school counselors from the Connecticut State Department of Education, the Connecticut School Counselor Association, and the Center for School Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation at the University of Massachusetts Amherst revealed schools with fewer students and more counselors had lower rates of student suspensions and disciplinary actions.
Former superintendent, educator, and school counselor Gary Marks spent decades working in Nebraska schools. He agreed that student counseling and support for teachers in the classroom have hit a critical point.
“You need way more counselors when you’re having all these mental health issues,” Marks told The Epoch Times.
For example, he pointed to where his grandchildren go to school in Tennessee’s Farragut school district, which has only two counselors for about 600 students.
He also thinks a general lack of respect for educators underscores why more are leaving their jobs early, and others are reluctant to apply.
“The respect situation is just a huge issue,” he said.
Marks was candid when asked about the difficulties of hiring new talent in schools. “I don’t know right now, given the way the world is, if I’d be interested in being a classroom teacher.”
Yet the struggle to keep existing educators and hire new ones is only half the battle. A new report from the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education indicates that university students pursuing teaching degrees are declining.
In 2019, U.S. colleges awarded fewer than 90,000 undergraduate degrees in education. That’s down from nearly 200,000 a year in the 1970s. Over the past 10 years alone, the number of people completing traditional teacher preparation programs has dropped by 35 percent.
“This is a five-alarm crisis,” said NEA president Becky Pringle.
One of the hurdles administrators face amid the staff scarcity is a lengthy certification and training process even after qualified university graduates apply to teach.
“I want to continue teaching—however, I’m being forced out,” Lisa Carley Hotaling told The Epoch Times.
Having taught in Michigan and New York, Hotaling found herself between a rock and a hard place after she took a teaching job in California as an emergency hire in the Alameda Unified school district.
Despite already having a master’s degree and more than a decade of education and classroom experience, she still has to take the California Basic Skills Test (CBEST) and go back to school specifically for her master’s in education to continue teaching.
“That only gives me a one year credential,” Hotaling explained. “[Then] I’ll be required to return to school to do what I’m already doing in the classroom. It makes no sense. And I have to pay for further education on top of it?”
Last year, the Golden State eliminated the requirement for the CBEST and the California Subject Matter Exams for Teachers (CSET) to earn a teaching credential, so long as the applicants complete approved coursework.
A student takes a standardized test in a file photo. (SIAATH/Shutterstock)
Yet, some districts still want their educators to complete the additional screening, despite a shortage of educators.
“It’s very tricky to fill positions,” Heather Dutton told The Epoch Times.
Dutton has been a math instructor for nine years in the Community Learning Center Schools in the San Francisco Bay area.
She explained a lot of time is spent training a teacher who may leave if they’re not a good fit. This happens more often with newer teachers because Dutton says the first three years are profoundly challenging.
“I went into COVID with seven years of teaching experience. If your first three hellish years are on top of a pandemic, it would just crush you,” Dutton said.
“We lost a lot of teachers before the pandemic anyway, maybe 30 percent. But if you started in the middle of this horrible pandemic … people think it’s just too hard and can get paid as much or more doing something else.”
And the lack of substitute teachers has created a disproportionately high workload for the educators who remain.
“The sub [teacher] shortage is awful. We haven’t had subs all year, I think the pool of them dried up during COVID,” Dutton noted.
Additionally, Rickard says the lack of substitutes makes it nearly impossible to be gone for even a day.
“I feel guilty if I have to take a day off. There’s literally no one to cover. It leaves everybody in a bind.”
Dutton mentioned that in the high schools in her district, only three teachers would return in the fall. The rest will be new hires.
“If all the veteran people give up—where will we be?” Rickard asked.
The California Legislature is poised to pass Assembly Bill 2098, described as a “medical misinformation bill.” If passed, the new law would prohibit doctors from freely providing medical advice and treating their patients if those practices run counter to the official state sanctioned position.
In April 2020, the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs, the California State Board of Pharmacy, and the Medical Board of California issued a statement (pdf) regarding the “improper prescribing of medications related to treatment of Novel Coronavirus,” such as hydroxychloroquine, warning that “inappropriately prescribing or dispensing medications constitutes unprofessional conduct in California.”
On June 29, 2021, the Federation of State Medical Boards issued a warning, stating that “Physicians who generate and spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation are risking disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license.”
In August 2021, Dr. Anthony Fauci said there was no evidence that ivermectin works, and that it’s more likely to cause harm. In December 2021, the Food and Drug Administration issued a warning headlined, “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.” In an updated April 29, 2022, report, the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel said it “recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in clinical trials.”
Should AB 2098 become law, doctors who prescribe medications not approved by the state or who claim unsanctioned drugs are effective would see their licenses revoked and face strict penalties and disciplinary actions by the Medical Board of California.
In short, AB 2098 would designate the dissemination of information not approved by the state related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, which causes “COVID-19,” as misinformation or disinformation, which constitutes unprofessional conduct.
One physician, Dr. Syed Haider, has already been reported to four state medical boards by pharmacists he says “don’t like filling ivermectin prescriptions.” He has also been forced to retain a lawyer to protect his medical license.
Dr. Syed Haider (Courtesy of Haider)
Since December 2020—after realizing that the United States had offshored almost all prescription drug manufacturing to unfriendly nations like China—Haider has focused on the prevention and treatment of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus through his online initiative mygotodoc.com, by providing easy online access to off-label prescriptions such as ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, budesonide, and protocols for COVID, long COVID, and vaccine injuries.
“There was such a huge demand for it, it just took over my life,” Haider, who used to be “a hospital doctor,” told The Epoch Times. “Then, the pandemic hit.”
In early February 2020, Haider contracted the CCP virus at a hospital that he was working in. His work as a temporary traveling physician across many different medical practices and hospitals was coming to an end and he thought that, with the pandemic outbreak, there would be plenty of work. However, although he had applied for a position at a hospital in New York, Haider had begun to hear about online prescribing, and he started to work through an unnamed online telemedicine provider in the United States.
“Once I heard about ivermectin and off-label prescribing, people would show up on the online website looking for help with COVID and I would try to tell them about off-label medications,” Haider recalled. “And they would just give me a blank stare. Aside from hydroxychloroquine, they had never heard about drugs like ivermectin. They thought I was crazy. I think the thought was, ‘If this stuff works, why haven’t I heard about it on CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC?”
According to Haider, what really changed things for him was when he saw the Dec. 8, 2020, testimony of Dr. Pierre Kory (pdf) before Sen. Ron Johnson and the Homeland Security Committee Meeting regarding early treatment of COVID-19, “not only as an individual physician,” but also on behalf of his non-profit organization, the Front-Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance.
“Although we, like many, are extremely encouraged by the apparent successes in developing effective vaccines,” Kory said, “we also are dismayed at the near complete absence of guidance and research on effective early, at-home, or preventative treatment options apart from vaccines—a reality we find unconscionable.”
It was “with great pride as well as significant optimism” that Kory reported that his group, “led by Professor Paul E. Marik,” had “developed a highly effective protocol for preventing and early treatment of COVID-19,” and that “emerging publications” had provided “conclusive data on the profound efficacy of the anti-parasite, anti-viral drug, anti-inflammatory agent called ivermectin in all stages of the disease.”
“It was real clear in his face and in his demeanor that he was really upset and very sincere and it went viral on the internet,” Haider recalled. “Then, people started hearing from family and friends that they had used ivermectin and it made a difference for them, and people went online to find doctors who would prescribe it. At that point, things got very busy and I had to basically start my own website and prescribing it online to patients. Over the next year and a half, things really ramped up. More and more people had begun hearing about ivermectin, so more and more people were looking for it.”
According to the website, “mygotodoc makes it easy to safeguard you and your family, serving three important needs the wider medical community tends to ignore: (1) emergency antibiotics to have on hand in case disaster strikes and prescription drugs are unavailable, (2) 1-month backup supplies of your regular medication, and (3) safe off-label COVID protocols designed for prevention and treatment.”
“Myself and other doctors from all over the world have had incredible results with off-label protocols including ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, budesonide, and a number of other protocols,” Haider explained. “What you hear over and over again is about the successful treatment of 5,000, 7,000, or 10,000 patients and maybe one death. They are shocking numbers compared to what you’re hearing with conventional treatments the CDC or FDA are recommending and what hospitals and other doctors are doing that are not using off-label protocols.”
Personally, Haider has treated over 50,000 COVID-related patients, many of them elderly. He said that among his patients, there have been zero deaths and only five hospitalizations. Despite his success, under California’s proposed Bill AB 2098, doctor’s using similar methods would have the state interfere and persecute them for providing independent care.
“Like a lot of other doctors around the world, I’ve just been trying to raise awareness of this,” Haider explained. “But, like a lot of doctors in America, I’ve gotten letters from the American Medical Association, the Federal State Medical Board warning me that my license is at risk if I speak out about vaccines or if I spread misinformation or if I prescribe ivermectin. I’ve had pushback from pharmacists, insurance companies, from medical boards in multiple states, that have sent me complaints and asked me to explain why I am conducting experimental trials on patients and why I am prescribing ivermectin.”
Prior to all of this, Haider had worked for over 10 years as a trained hospital physician in internal medicine and had “never had a single complaint from anyone on anything.”
“So, it was a very strange experience over the past couple of years to see what has happened to medical providers, including pharmacists,” Haider explained. “Pharmacists were pushing back at us because they were getting letters from their pharmacist boards warning them not to dispense it. ”
According to Haider, dissenting voices have been muzzled and censored from the very onset of the pandemic and they are now being threatened with the loss of their medical licenses. Because of this, Haider has had to retain an attorney.
“It’s very stressful to have to reply to a medical board,” he explained, adding that it’s a “very opaque process.”
“You don’t know who is going to see it or review it. You don’t know whether or not they’re friendly to what you are doing or if they disagree with what you are doing, and it’s not like a court of law where you can bring in witnesses in your defense. They just make a decision and sometimes they don’t even explain to you the reason behind it.”
Worse than that, Haider said his experience felt like they were trying to get doctors like himself to “get tripped up and to say the wrong things” and to incriminate themselves.
“One of the medical boards accused me of conducting medical experimental trials,” he said. “It’s not like they don’t know I’m prescribing off-label. We do off-label prescribing all the time in medicine. About 40 percent of prescribing is off-label and it doesn’t fall under the classification of ‘experiment.’ It’s not an unauthorized experimental medical trial. But they use that wording to try to get me to defend myself against that attack. If I had foolishly replied to them and tried to defend myself against their terminology, I would have incriminated myself because I can’t run an experiment without having a review board, authorization, and specific consent forms for experimental drug trials.”
Haider reflected on how during the current shift to vilify ivermectin that “everyone seems to forget that, during the past six months, they had the same problems with prescribing hydroxychloroquine.”
“I can send a hydroxychloroquine prescription to any pharmacist and they’ll fill it without question,” he said. “But now, they won’t fill ivermectin. It almost seems political rather than medical. It’s not scientific. There’s something else going on and it’s very strange. We can now prescribe things through pharmacies they used to vilify. But because our entire medical establishment has now decided that ivermectin must be killed, pharmacists now have a problem with ivermectin.”
According to Haider, the purpose of what he described as the “medical misinformation bill” in front of the California Legislature is to prevent doctors from saying things that the state deems to be disinformation. “That,” he said, “begs the question of who decides what is the truth?”
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testifies during a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on Jan. 11, 2022 (Shawn Thew/Getty Images)
“In any scientific field or endeavor, there is no absolute truth,” he explained, asserting that “Dr. Fauci is not science, like he claims to be.”
“He does not have the last word on what scientific truth is. We’re always getting closer to the truth, but we have never arrived at a final truth in medicine. So, there always has to be room for debate. Doctors have to be able to take multiple different sides of an argument. So physicians have to be able to hash things out among themselves and to prescribe off-label. You can’t single out one disease and say, ‘This is off limits for the way we’ve conducted medicine for the past 100 years.’ Patients should be able to consult with their physician, discuss treatments and risks, and make decisions without the interference of the government.
“In nearly every hospital and clinic in the United States right now, it’s considered to be some form of misinformation or disinformation to say anything other than the vaccines are safe and effective,” Haider noted. “To say there are any risks associated with the vaccines is claimed to be misinformation or disinformation, and the working definition of misinformation or disinformation seems to be anything that would prevent someone from submitting to or doubting the FDA and CDC guidelines and recommendations.”
This bill would affect any doctor licensed in California, including Haider.
If AB 2098 becomes law, any doctor who prescribes ivermectin—even at the request of their patient—can lose their license to practice medicine in California.
“Once you lose your license in one state and you have licenses to practice in other states, you have to report that you lost your license in California to every other state you are licensed in, and then every medical board will start asking questions like, ‘Why did you lose your license in California.’ Once the snowball starts rolling, depending on what the medical board thinks about the reasoning behind the loss of your license in California, you can lose all of your licenses.”
In the wake of the pandemic, Haider noted how the country has been further compromised by unprecedented delays in supply lines. We no longer have domestic manufacturing of almost any medications, including and especially antibiotics. In fact, China has captured over 97 percent of the U.S. market for antibiotics. In the setting of runaway inflation, food shortages, and soaring gas prices, it’s easy to imagine an America where pharmacy shelves are bare, or with limited stock and huge price increases.
If AB 2098 becomes law, the precedent that would be set is California gets to become the proving grounds for new legislation, not just in medicine, but in everything, Haider said.
“Once you make this inroad in violation of physician autonomy on how to treat COVID for their patients, that could just be the beginning,” Haider warned. “What about after that? Do you go after a doctor’s ability to prescribe off-label for anything? Do we have to be restricted to what has been FDA approved for any indication? What happens when we don’t have an on-label drug for the treatment of an indication? What then? How do we treat our patients then?”
The Epoch Times has reached out to California Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Cupertino), sponsor of the Assembly version of the bill, as well as the Medical Board of California.
Gov. Kristi Noem: Power over personal health choices ‘is not President Biden’s to give away’
Republican governors Ron DeSantis (Fla.), Glenn Youngkin (Va.), and Kristi Noem (S.D.) denounced the Biden administration’s proposed amendments to the World Health Organization’s International Health Regulations.
“We in Florida, there is no way we will ever support this WHO thing,” DeSantis said Monday. “No way.”
The amendments would change WHO’s surveillance methods, allowing the organization to “develop early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources.” WHO would provide member nations with assessments that indicate “the level of risk of potential spread and risks of potential serious public health impacts, based on assessed infectiousness and severity of the illness.”
The amendments would also change how WHO determines public health emergencies. While the previous regulations task the organization’s director-general and each member nation with determining a crisis, the amendments delegate that power solely to the director-general. The amendments also allow the director-general to issue an intermediate public health alert if he deems that a crisis requires international awareness, even if it doesn’t meet international public health emergency standards.
DeSantis is not the only governor wary of the amendments.
“South Dakota will continue to trust our people to exercise personal responsibility over their health,” Noem said in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon. “That power is not President Biden’s to give away—the 10th Amendment reserves it for the states and for the people.”
A spokeswoman for Youngkin called the Biden administration’s plans “incredibly concerning” and said “giving WHO sovereignty over U.S. health decisions” is “not something Governor Youngkin condones or supports.”
WHO has a history of working against U.S. interests. Under the leadership of Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the organization repeatedly allowed the Communist regime in China to hold sway over official health decisions. At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO followed Beijing’s lead and falsely claimed for weeks that human-to-human transmission was unconfirmed. A top WHO official in July 2020 promoted an anti-Taiwan conspiracy theory about the virus. Under former president Donald Trump, the United States withdrew from the organization, but President Joe Biden reversed Trump’s decision.
Delegates from almost 200 countries have gathered this month in Geneva, Switzerland, for the 75th World Health Assembly, where they are discussing the changes.
Member nations are allowed to reject WHO’s emergency assistance, but they must alert WHO of their rationale within 48 hours of the rejection.
The Biden administration’s proposals would establish “compliance committees” in each member country to gather information and promote compliance with regulations.
Members hope to establish a new pandemic agreement in addition to the International Health Regulations, which legally bind countries to detect and report potential health threats. If approved, these amendments are not expected to take effect until 2024.
In his Monday remarks to the World Health Assembly, a meeting of WHO’s legislative body, Health and Human Services director of global affairs Loyce Pace said the United States is pleased “with the consensus reached this week on concrete action and further work to strengthen existing tools available to the WHO and to all Member States.”
“This includes strengthening the International Health Regulations from 2005 to clarify roles and responsibilities, increase transparency and accountability, share best practices, and communicate in real-time with our global partners,” Pace said.
Member nations have until August to decide on initial drafts of the amendments.
Update 10:53 p.m.: This piece has been updated to include comment from Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R., Va.).
John Pierce Law has filed a lawsuit against Atlas Air, on behalf of US Freedom Flyers (USFF) and Atlas employees, and plans to sue all major airlines, 18 altogether, plus the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT), contending that the vaccine mandates imposed by these agencies on the airlines’ employees infringed on their constitutional, religious, and medical liberties.
The lawsuit against Atlas Air was filed in federal court in the Southern District of Florida, with over 100 plaintiffs pursuing litigation.
“Fundamentally, this case is about whether Americans should be required to choose between their livelihoods and being coerced into taking an experimental, dangerous medical treatment,” reads the lawsuit (pdf).
Plaintiffs are mostly unvaccinated pilots, flight attendants, as well as other Atlas staff.
“It is also about the safety of America’s airline industry. Should pilots—under federal regulation required to be among the healthiest workers in the United States—who have taken an experimental ‘vaccine’ that is now shown to have potentially deadly, long-term side effects, be allowed to fly massive aircraft in our skies? While those who have (smartly) refrained from such a course be forced out of their jobs?” it states.
Atlas Air is one of the industry’s largest cargo carrier companies and the world’s largest operator of the Boeing 747 aircraft.
The law firm was founded by Att. John Pierce, who founded the National Constitutional Law Union. He previously represented George Papadopoulos in connection with the 2016 “Russia Hoax,” reaching a dismissal of the DNC’s case and helping secure a presidential pardon. He is also currently representing defendants being charged in connection to the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.
“So the complaint has been filed. We’re in the process of serving everyone. And then, we’ll likely be looking for some kind of injunctive relief here soon to make sure that all the COVID-related mandates stop immediately. And then we’ll proceed [with] litigation, motion, practice, and discovery and then onward to trial eventually,” Pierce told The Epoch Times.
This week, John Pierce Law plans to file another lawsuit against United Airlines.
“We’ll be hitting basically all of them in sequence, and then we’ll be going after the FAA as well. We’re gonna get these vaccine mandate type of rules and COVID restrictions ruled unconstitutional. And we’re gonna get findings that there was discrimination under Title Seven. We’re gonna get punitive damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress and things like that,” Pierce said.
“It’s going to require a big fix, ultimately. And that’s probably going to require legislation and kind of getting all the stakeholders at the table, but the first step is civil litigation.”
Airlines, which are government contractors, are affected by President Joe Biden’s order from September of last year that states all employees of those companies have to be vaccinated against the Chinese Communist Party virus.
Pierce said that as soon as he heard about the airline mandates he predicted that it would be the next big wave of litigations.
“[These lawsuits are] absolutely crucial. It’s a very, very red line—If you get to the point where you have to choose between getting an experimental drug shot in your arm and your paycheck, that’s just unAmerican, it’s unconstitutional, it’s outrageous, it’s sickening.”
“If that’s not the hill to die on when it comes to liberty, that’s about as close as I can imagine it,” Pierce said.
Josh Yoder, a major airline pilot and a spokesperson for Freedom Flyers who recently supported the trucker-led “The People’s Convoy,” says that there has been harassment, threats, intimidation, vaccine injuries, and even “suicides that have come out of these mandates.”
“We’re not doing class action. We’re doing individual litigants. And the reason we’re doing it that way is because so many people have been harmed and people have experienced different levels of harm. We have the unvaccinated who have been harassed, threatened, and intimidated into getting vaccinated. Then we have many people as well who got vaccinated against their will, who were coerced and forced into doing it under threat of losing their employment,” Yoder said.
“And then, in addition, we have the vaccine-injured, and the numbers of vaccine-injured are growing by the day,” Yoder went on, “It’s just incredible what’s happening with pilots.”
Pilots have to maintain a flight physical in order to maintain their licenses.
The Epoch Times recently reported that a pilot for American Airlines, one of the top 3 largest airlines in the country, suffered a cardiac arrest between two flights, about 6 minutes after landing.
“And so what we’re seeing is many pilots are experiencing health conditions. Specifically, cardiac issues [are] what we’re seeing a lot of. And many of these pilots are afraid to come forward because if they come forward they lose their flight physical, they lose their flight medical. So they’re continuing to fly. We have a lot of pilots that are flying with chest pain and neurological conditions, because if they come forward they lose their careers,” Yoder said.
Freedom Flyers is now acting as an advocacy group between the pilots, the FAA, and the companies in order to assist them in coming forward and speaking out on their conditions.
“We have a massive team of medical professionals who are helping these people, but we’re asking everyone to come forward. While it’s absolutely devastating to their careers, we need them to come forward because this is the safety of the American public that we’re talking about,” Yoder said.
According to a group of attorneys, doctors, and other experts—and a pilot who says his career ended due to adverse reactions from a vaccine—the FAA has been breaking its own rule that states pilots should not fly after having taken medications that have been approved for less than a year, The Epoch Times reported in December.
The Epoch Times reached out to Atlas Air for comment.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is responding to a string of monkeypox outbreaks, and will be convening an emergency meeting on the virus and its global spread.
In terms of government power, the timing of this outbreak couldn’t be better for the WHO—which may soon be granted powers to manage laws on global health outbreaks, and which is oddly well-positioned for a monkeypox outbreak following a recent “germ-games” call, and recent incidents tied to figures who include Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates.
The New York Post declared, “The World Health Organization is reportedly convening an emergency meeting into the alarming spread of monkeypox around the world—including a possible case in the Big Apple.” The Telegraph reports that the United Nations health authority will be bringing together “a group of leading experts” in the meeting, which is believed to be focused on how the virus is suddenly spreading so widely. It also allegedly will look into the virus’s prevalence among homosexual men and on the “vaccination situation.”
The numbers of infections are by no means high. By May 23, the University of Oxford and Harvard Medical School recorded 245 either confirmed or suspected cases in the entire world. Sajid Javid, the UK health secretary, wrote on Twitter: “Most cases are mild …”
A woman is seen cycling in a completely empty Navona Square in Rome, on March 13, 2020. The city’s streets were eerily quiet on the second day of a nationwide shuttering of schools, shops, and other public places. (Marco Di Lauro/Getty Images)
The timing of all of this is important. It gives the WHO a chance to show its worth, since it’s in the process of trying to get new and expansive powers—under the banner of governing global health emergencies.
The United Nations is considering various amendments to the WHO at its 75th World Health Assembly in Geneva, that could give its director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the unilateral authority to declare a public health emergency with far-reaching powers over the laws of sovereign nations.
Not only would this give Tedros the ability to declare a public health emergency in any nation he wants—using whatever evidence he wants—but it would also allow him to dictate policies that the target country should adopt to respond to the U.N.’s declared emergency. If a country refuses, a proposed amendment could give the WHO the ability to sanction that country.
If you’re wondering whether giving such powers to a U.N. agency that couldn’t demonstrate its independence from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) could fly in the face of U.S. law, it seems that President Joe Biden has the answer. Not only is the Biden administration allowing this shift in power to the WHO, but it’s also helping advance it.
The United States proposed amendments to the WHO in January, which will be considered at the U.N. meeting in Geneva, The Epoch Times reports. These included an amendment that would allow the WHO to make public declarations on a health crisis without needing to consult with the target country, and without needing to get verification from local officials. The Biden administration’s proposals would also give $2.47 billion in funding to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for things including “enhancements to domestic sentinel surveillance programs,” “investments in global genomic surveillance approaches,” and other systems.
As The Epoch Times reports, “Respiratory surveillance platforms include video cameras and recorders that alert authorities when members of the public are seen coughing or otherwise acting in a manner that could indicate the presence of an infectious disease or help spread one already present in a population. Such equipment is widely used in China.”
A man wearing a protective face mask walks under surveillance cameras as China is hit by an outbreak of the novel coronavirus, in Shanghai, on March 4, 2020. (Aly Song/Reuters)
Whether or not monkeypox poses a large threat to public health, it presents a serious threat to public freedom. The virus could act as a Trojan horse, carrying inside it all the justifications to grant the WHO a dictator’s dream of global power, and give the CDC a system of surveillance beyond anything Orwell could have conceived.
Under normal circumstances, monkeypox wouldn’t be a large viral risk. The CDC states that it can be transmitted human-to-human mainly by respiratory droplets that typically don’t travel more than a few feet, and so it notes that “prolonged face-to-face contact is required.”
Even Biden is walking back his statements that people should be concerned about monkeypox, and is clarifying that it’s not as serious of a threat as COVID-19.
Regardless of its inability to spread widely under normal circumstances, a global discussion on monkeypox vaccines started in 2021 after Gates warned of a smallpox bioterrorist attack as a potential next pandemic. He called on world leaders to hold “germ games” and give the WHO new powers—similar to the ones they may soon receive—under a new WHO “Pandemic Task Force.”
Gates also called for pandemic surveillance systems, which seem eerily similar to what the Biden administration submitted in its proposed amendments for the WHO’s new powers.
“It’ll take probably about $1 billion a year for a pandemic Task Force at the WHO level, which is doing the surveillance and actually doing what I call ‘germ games’ where you practice.” Gates said in 2021, Sky News reported. “You say, OK, what if a bioterrorist brought smallpox to 10 airports? You know, how would the world respond to that?”
Even though the mention of smallpox by Gates was minor, it purportedly was used to justify new discussions on a smallpox vaccine that could also treat monkeypox. Just several days later, on Nov. 8, 2021, Precision Vaccinations reported, “Gates Germ-Game Warning Motivates Smallpox Vaccine Discussions.”
The “discussions” in question were about a Jynneos Smallpox and Monkeypox Vaccine—approved in 2019. Precision Vaccinations noted that it’s “the only FDA-approved non-replicating smallpox vaccine and the only FDA-approved monkeypox vaccine for non-military use.”
Movement within the CDC began a few days earlier, on Nov. 3, 2021. It says that “the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices reviewed the two presentations focused on the smallpox vaccine Jynneos.”
And then, just several days later, an even stranger occurrence took place—carrying out the idea of a “germ game” similar to what Gates proposed.
Bill Gates at the Élysée Palace to encounter the French president to speak about Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), in Paris, on April 16, 2018. (Frederic Legrand—COMEO/Shutterstock)
The Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) partnered with the Munich Security Conference to imagine a pandemic scenario with monkeypox. Following the hypothetical warning from Gates, the germ game imagined a strain of monkeypox, released through a bioterrorist attack, that had been altered to be resistant to vaccines.
On Nov. 23, 2021, the NTI published its results from the tabletop game, which showed the spread of the virus over the course of 18 months.
“By the end of the exercise, the fictional pandemic resulted in more than 3 billion cases and 270 million fatalities worldwide,” it states.
In an incredible act of foresight, the exercise from last year imagined that monkeypox would appear almost exactly when it did: in mid-May this year.
The NTI also published a detailed report on its results. According to a timeline on page 12 of the report, it imagined that in May 2022, the initial outbreak of monkeypox would infect 1,421 people and kill four people. By January 2023, it would spread to 83 countries, infect 70 million, and kill 1.3 million. At that point, it would be discovered that monkeypox had been engineered to be vaccine-resistant, and supply chain challenges would make a response more difficult.
After one year, on May 10, 2023, it was predicted to infect 480 million people and kill 27 million, and it would be revealed that a bioterror attack on a civilian biolab had been the origin. Then, by Dec. 1, 2023, the virus would be estimated to infect 3.2 billion people and kill 271 million.
Of course, the important caveat with their estimates is that the monkeypox strain they imagined was one that had been engineered to be vaccine-resistant. Accurate or not, the exercise gives authorities a predictive scenario to justify “pandemic response” policies. And we’ve seen this happen before.
Vials of smallpox vaccine sit on a counter at a vaccination facility in Altamonte Springs, Fla., on Dec. 16, 2002. (Chris Livingston/Getty Images)
A very similar “germ game” was held just before the outbreak of COVID-19, with many of the same figures involved now making noise about monkeypox and a new “pandemic.”
New York Magazine reported in February 2020 that “two months before the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 emerged in central China, a group of public-health experts gathered in New York City for a simulation.” It also noted, “The characteristics of the virus currently causing global havoc are remarkably similar to the one proposed in the simulation, dubbed ‘Event 201.’”
Partners in the exercise included the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Similar to the monkeypox “germ game” before the monkeypox outbreak, the coronavirus “germ game” before the coronavirus outbreak made predictions of a mass fatality scenario. It estimated that 65 million people would die.
The Center for Health Security issued a statement on its coronavirus exercise on Jan. 24, 2020. It stated that they weren’t predicting that COVID-19 would kill 65 million people, as the simulated virus was different from the CCP virus.
Yet the important thing wasn’t the specifics of the “germ game,” but instead, how the game and its participants went on to inform government policy.
And now, with monkeypox, we’ve arrived at a similar impasse. A “germ game” imagined the potential effect of the virus, and produced inflated numbers of deaths and infections by an imaginary version of monkeypox as the model, which was resistant to vaccines. Most importantly, this also coincides with the international community weighing whether the WHO should be granted powers to govern global health emergencies.
Among the trends of COVID-19 is that governments may now be more inclined to use a seasonal virus, already declared as endemic, to justify an indefinite global emergency. Additionally, small outbreaks can also be used to justify deeply authoritarian policies that aren’t limited to health care.
The worst example of this is the CCP, which is claiming to use single-digit infections to lock down entire megacities. And remember that under the Trump administration, the WHO was shown to be unable to demonstrate its independence from the CCP.
Health emergency response is also no longer limited to just medicine. The COVID-19 model included mass changes to election systems that undermined the basic integrity of elected government, and widespread censorship under the narrative of fighting “disinformation” and “misinformation.” Remember that at the beginning of the pandemic, the WHO and various U.N. agencies declared an “infodemic” that required controls and censorship of public information.
In the backdrop of the monkeypox scare, the world is preparing to hand the keys to the kingdom to the WHO. And with the strange track of “germ games” and overblown numbers by the so-called experts pulling the strings, the groundwork for this public takeover has already been laid.
The World Economic Forum has removed a document from its website, which revealed the attendance of the Mayor of the Chinese city of Wuhan – which hosts the lab believed to be responsible for COVID-19 – at one of its events.
Former Wuhan Mayor Tang Liangzhi is included on the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) list of attendees to its 2013 “Meeting of the New Champions.” The event, hosted in China, is described by the WEF as the “premier gathering in Asia of leaders of multinational corporations [and] governments.” “The Meeting was held in close collaboration with the Government of the People’s Republic of China,” explains the WEF meeting summary.
A link containing a 42-page document, which revealed hundreds of attendees at the event, reroutes users to an error page reading “Apologies – this section of our website is currently unavailable.” An archived version of the webpage, however, reveals a document containing a list of the event’s participants, including the then-Mayor of the Wuhan Municipal Government Tang Liangzhi.
DELETED WEBPAGE.
Tang, 61, served as Mayor of Wuhan from 2011 to 2014 before serving in the same role in other cities including Chengdu and Chongqing. He was later promoted in December 2021 to the Party Branch Secretary of the Anhui Provincial Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), which has been identified as the “highest-ranking entity overseeing” China’s United Front by the U.S. government.
The effort aims to “to co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party” and “influence overseas Chinese communities, foreign governments, and other actors to take actions or adopt positions supportive of Beijing’s preferred policies.” The U.S. State Department also compares the United Front to the Chinese regime’s “magic weapon” to compromise Western politicians and elites.
Tang’s ties to Wuhan follow controversy of the city and one of its premier laboratories, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, potentially being the source of COVID-19. The lab, which is under the control of the Chinese Communist Party, manipulated bat coronaviruses with striking genetic similarities to COVID-19 to become deadlier to humans.
The WEF has also been accused of exploiting COVID-19 to advance its transformational social, political, and business agenda through its push for the “Great Reset.”
Experimental drugs aim to help treat seasonal allergies
The National Institutes of Health division led by Dr. Anthony Fauci is slated to spend nearly $2 million to force feed puppies with experimental allergy drugs, according to a government watchdog group.
NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is helmed by Fauci, allocated $1,836,453 in taxpayer dollars for a contractor to test an experimental hay fever drug on mice, rats, and dogs, including puppies, according to the funding documents, which were obtained by the White Coat Waste Project and provided to the Washington Free Beacon. The most severe symptoms of hay fever, also known as seasonal allergies, are a runny nose and sneezing.
The documents, which were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request and are highly redacted, show that the division requested at least five separate experiments on dogs that are likely to include force-feeding them experimental drugs for several months. While the contractor conducting the tests, Inimmune Corp., said guinea pigs could be used in place of dogs for some testing, purchasing “six-month old puppies” that would be exposed to allergens and then used for testing was also proposed.
NIH’s animal experiments have become a flashpoint in Congress after it emerged earlier this year that the government spent $2.5 million injecting beagle puppies with cocaine, sparking a bipartisan investigation, which was first reported by the Free Beacon. The NIH also funds labs in Russia, even as it invades Ukraine, including one lab that conducted “horrific and barbaric experiments on 18 cats.” The disclosure of the latest funding tranche is likely to build momentum for legislation called the Preventing Animal Abuse and Waste Act that would bar NIAID from conducting these types of dog experiments.
“Fauci’s white coats at NIAID have forced taxpayers to pay millions to de-bark and poison puppies, infest beagles with ticks and flies, and, now, needlessly torture puppies to test a new drug to treat a runny nose,” Devin Murphy, White Coat Waste Project’s public policy and communications manager, told the Free Beacon. “Even NIAID’s own contractor acknowledges that the dog testing demanded by Fauci’s agency is unnecessary because alternative animal models are available.”
The latest animal experiment grant, which began on September 1, 2021, and is slated to end in August 2023, indicates that NIAID attempted to purchase “allergic dogs” from a supplier, but ran into supply roadblocks. “Unfortunately, all of the allergic dogs from the [redacted] have not been available,” the documents state. “Six-month old puppies” were proposed as an alternative solution, though it is unclear if NIH went forward with that suggestion.
NIAID’s contractor, Inimmune Corp., suggested guinea pigs be used “instead of dog studies,” according to the documents, indicating that dog experiments were unnecessary and raising questions about the government’s desire to use them as lab subjects. This proposal was under consideration as of January 2022.
White Coat Waste Project is challenging the redactions in the documents and has submitted follow-up requests to obtain information on the experiments.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R., S.C.), who is spearheading the PAAW Act and investigating NIH for its animal experiments, told the Free Beacon that U.S. taxpayers should not be forced to foot the bill for “unnecessary and cruel” government tests.
“Americans across the political spectrum have been horrified to learn their tax dollars are being used to subsidize NIAID’s barbaric experiments on beagle puppies,” Mace said in a statement. “I’m proud to be leading the bipartisan PAAW Act to ensure taxpayer money is not used to support outdated, unnecessary and cruel experiments on dogs.”
Joe Biden’s proposed amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) authority are “the greatest threat to our sovereignty that we’ve faced in a long time,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) told The Epoch Times on May 23.
“For this administration to sell this country down the river like he’s doing, to deal with somebody who is under the influence of China, who is a person who has not had the first inclination to investigate where the coronavirus came from, to give him more authority?” the South Carolina Republican asked. “We’re going to ring the bells.”
The individual whom Norman was referencing is Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a former government minister from Ethiopia who has been the WHO’s director-general since 2017.
As previously reported by The Epoch Times, Tedros would receive significant authority to act unilaterally if a package of Biden administration-proposed amendments to the United Nations International Health Regulations (IHR) are adopted. The IHR defines WHO’s regulatory powers regarding public health issues around the world.
Biden’s amendments are to be considered this week during the annual conference in Geneva of the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of the WHO. The United States provides more than $150 million in assessed contributions to fund the WHO, and has given on average an additional $262 million in annual voluntary funding since 2012.
Under the proposed amendments, WHO would be empowered to declare a public health emergency in any country regardless of whether officials in the country concur with the declaration. The WHO director-general also would be allowed to rely on evidence from sources other than those approved by the affected country as the basis of such a declaration.
The Biden WHO amendments are the latest step in the current president’s efforts to reintegrate the United States with WHO after his predecessor, President Donald Trump, slashed U.S. funding to the international health organization and then gave notice of U.S. withdrawal in 2020. Biden during his first week in the Oval Office repealed Trump’s withdrawal notice.
While the amendments were drafted at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and circulated among WHO officials in January, the proposals weren’t publicly discussed by federal officials until April.
Asked if he expects that a Republican congressional majority, if elected in November, would move to defund the United States’ contributions to WHO, Norman said: “This is a complete sellout. It shows the corruption of the administration and, yes, we are going to do everything we can, particularly if we can take the House with good numbers that will give us leverage, and the Senate as well.”
The United States was assessed $120.5 million in WHO dues for fiscal 2020, although only about half of that amount was paid before Trump issued his withdrawal notice. The United States has also provided additional annual voluntary contributions totaling on average $262 million since 2012.
In a related development on May 23, the House Freedom Caucus, an assembly of the lower chamber’s most reliably conservative members, made public its letter to Biden demanding that he “halt your efforts to empower [WHO] and instead either immediately resume President Trump’s withdrawal from the body or, at the very least, push serious reforms to aggressively correct the organization’s rampant corruption and ineffectual leadership.”
Meanwhile, Tedros was reappointed to a second five-year term as director-general; no opposition candidates were submitted.
The House Freedom Caucus also told Biden that “not only did you fail to propose an alternative candidate to Dr. Tedros … you are now attempting to hand him more control. We call on you to instead use the 75th World Health Assembly as an opportunity to demand a radical course correction and change in leadership.”
A copy of the letter was made available to The Epoch Times. Norman is one of the group’s 42 House members.
The letter further says that “as efforts continue by WHO Member States to negotiate a ‘global pandemic treaty,’ we demand that you provide the American people with total transparency and respect for our nation’s sovereignty. Under no circumstances should you cede our government’s operational control in a public health emergency to an international body.”
If such a treaty is agreed upon by WHO members, the letter stated, “we expect you to fully comply with Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly states that ‘the President shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.’”
Robert Snow, a pilot for American Airlines, one of the top 3 largest airlines in the country, has 31 years of commercial airline experience and additionally seven years of experience as a U.S. Air Force pilot.
Snow says that he might not be able to fly again after he suffered a cardiac arrest only 6 or 7 minutes after landing a plane he piloted from Denver to Dallas Fort Worth (DFW).
He still had two more flights scheduled on April 9.
He believes that his cardiac arrest is connected to the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine he was forced to take in order to keep his job on Nov. 4, 2021, even though he already had natural immunity from previously contracting the virus.
Dr. Peter McCullough, a world-renowned cardiologist, told Newsmax that Snow’s case fits a “pattern.”
“There is no other explanation,” McCullough said about Snow’s case since Snow has no coronary disease.
“The MRI pattern is consistent,” the doctor said. “Indeed, it may have been vaccine-induced myocarditis with a late manifestation of cardiac death.”
In addition, he told The Epoch Times that he has received “several phone calls and communications from friends in the industry that do think that they might have had issues with a vaccine.”
Most alarming is that some pilots are “afraid to raise the flag and say, ‘Hey, I think I might have an issue because they’re afraid they’ll either lose their medical certification to fly, which if we lose our medical, we can no longer operate. We can’t be a commercial pilot anymore. And in worst-case scenario, which is what right now probably what I’m experiencing is you can’t fly at all. Period,” Snow said.
“I would just tell you that there are other pilots out there that have had concerns, not just pilots, also because it was an employee mandate. So we have flight attendants, we have mechanics, we have dispatchers, we have gate agents, you name it. Of course, for pilots, we consider that a safety-sensitive job so we’re a little bit more concerned from the standpoint of aviation safety; but yes, I have received calls from other pilots and other communications stating that they have concerns but because of the nature of this, they’re afraid to come forward.”
The veteran pilot had serious questions about the novel COVID vaccines that are supposed to prevent infection from the Chinese Communist Party virus, but are now known to providelittle protection against infection after the Omicron virus variant became dominant.
What’s more, cases of myocarditis—inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis—inflammation of the lining outside the heart have spiked dramatically since the COVID vaccines started being administered worldwide.
He did not want to get the shot, but being the sole provider for his family, decided to take the risk.
Amid short sighs, Snow told The Epoch Times: “Initially, my employer was not going to force the vaccine on its employees. They subsequently changed their mind on approximately October 1, in conjunction with the executive office here in the United States mandate on federal contractors. They decided that now that they would enforce the vaccine mandate on all employees of the airline. And in regard to that, we were told that if we did not receive the vaccination we would be terminated. There was no question as to the sincerity at that time of their statement.”
Airlines, which are government contractors, were affected by President Joe Biden’s executive order from September that states all employees of those companies have to be vaccinated against the CCP virus.
The Epoch Times reported on December last year that the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) was breaking its own rule that states pilots should not fly after having taken medications that have been approved for less than a year, according to a group of attorneys, doctors, and other experts; including another pilot who says his career ended due to adverse reactions from a vaccine.
“So I elected, after some serious consideration given that I was the sole source of income for my family, that I would go ahead and receive the vaccine. I didn’t want to,” Snow said.
“I had serious questions as to the safety and the efficiency and the effectiveness of the vaccine. I’d already had COVID. I’d already tested positive for antibodies, and really didn’t see the rationale for it. But, the only solution that might have been available to me to not receive the vaccine was to request a religious or medical exemption. Neither of which did I really feel like I should request. Medical exemption, I didn’t have any reason to not to, scientifically speaking, not receive it, other than the fact that it was issued under an EUA and not fully tested. And as far as a religious exemption, I didn’t see any reason to request that because I don’t really have a religious belief that would prevent me from receiving this particular vaccination. So for moral and ethical reasons, absolutely. But that wasn’t considered a valid reason not to get the vaccine.”
The veteran pilot had a sore arm for 10 days after getting the jab, and later experienced a strange pain that spread through his upper body.
Snow said that his arm became “pretty sore,” for 10 days, something which he didn’t experience with any previous vaccinations. For other vaccines for travel or in the military, he would usually have soreness for two or three days maximum.
Things returned to normal until January, then he recalled:
“I was on that course of a flight and noticed a strange pain while I was working on the overhead panel. … I got a strange pain in my right shoulder, seemed to spread down to my lower right quadrant and then up into my chest and through my shoulder blades, which I thought was very strange, but I just kind of chalked it up to manipulating myself oddly on the overhead panel, maybe tweaked a nerve or something like that, because I really had no history of that whatsoever that I’d ever experienced. And so [the] pain went away after one or two minutes and then back to normal.
“When we finished that flight, I actually tested positive again for COVID for the second time, [the] first time I had it was in March of 2021. Second time then would have been in January of 2022—this is postvaccination mind you— and that was what I presumed to be the Omicron variant because it presented itself basically as just allergies, I kept sneezing a lot, runny nose and that was it, no fever, no chills, no nothing, no loss of taste and smell like I had the first time. So I went back to work, after the mandatory amount of time, and I started getting the pain again, only a little bit more frequently this time. So actually, with a history of gastrointestinal issues, I went to see a gastroenterologist he elected to do an endoscopy to take a look to see if I had maybe a hiatal hernia or something that was aggravating the vagus nerve. We also did an abdominal CAT scan.
“During the course of awaiting the results of the abdominal CAT scan, that’s when I had my sudden cardiac arrest and that was after the course of a flight from Denver to DFW. We had been on the gate just a few minutes after shutting the aircraft down, probably about six minutes, six, seven minutes after touchdown. And I stood up to collect my bags to proceed to the next aircraft. We were to finish up with another turn to a different city to come back and then finish the trip on day four. And that’s the last I remember, standing up collecting my luggage. And at that point, witnesses say I collapsed in the flight deck. And that’s all I know at this point. When I woke up, I was in the ICU at Baylor Scott and White in Grapevine Texas, having suffered a sudden cardiac arrest.”
He now has to wear an automatic external defibrillator or “life vest” that monitors his heartbeats, except when he showers when he is supposed to be monitored by a family member. The life vest is designed so that if the heart rhythm becomes abnormal, it will send a small shock to get it back to sinus rhythm, and if it detects full atrial fibrillation, ventricular fibrillation, or any sort of fibrillation, it would send a much stronger shock to try to get it back to the right rhythm.
Albeit all this trauma, Snow feels very fortunate because he was able to get professional care immediately, which is not the case for many other people.
According to heart.org: “Cardiac arrest is when the heart stops beating. Some 350,000 cases occur each year outside of a hospital, and the survival rate is less than 12 percent. CPR can double or triple the chances of survival.”
“If you look at the numbers … I try not to look too closely at them because it’s rather intimidating.” Snow said, referring to the survival rate of cardiac arrests.
“The thing that concerns me, is [that] this happened in the right place at the right time. Because if it had happened … any other time where I was either alone or beyond reasonable response time for a medical response, I wouldn’t be here having this conversation.”
John Pierce Law, who previously represented many prominent conservatives, is going to sue 18 major airlines, including American Airlines, focusing on the alleged unconstitutionality of the vaccine mandates that were imposed on the airline employees.
The Epoch Times has reached out to Johnson & Johnson for comment.
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican, vetoed legislation on May 20 that would ban public school mask mandates.
“I was shocked, really shocked,” state Rep. Melissa Blasek, a Republican and the measure’s sponsor, told The Epoch Times. “I 100 percent assumed this bill was a done deal.”
Blasek said H.B. 1131 was so popular that it drew a huge crowd of parents during one of the state’s worst snowstorms to a hearing in support of it.
She called Sununu’s veto “a huge political misstep” that “pacified the left” while “alienating parents on the right and in the middle.”
Many state Republicans reacted similarly on social media. State Rep. Leah Cushman, the Republican who led the legislation to make human-grade ivermectin available without a prescription in New Hampshire, posted on Facebook that Sununu’s veto of the statewide mask ban in public schools was “disgraceful.”
“Our Republican-majority house has been kicking butt all session despite the slim majority and members who vote like Dems, only for the senate and governor to kill it all,” Cushman said.
New Hampshire Republicans said they were especially stumped by the veto since Sununu held a press conference in February with the state’s epidemiologist, Dr. Benjamin Chan, announcing that his administration was calling upon schools to end mask mandates.
Asked then if his call to end school mask mandates was an option or a mandate to schools, Sununu said that “ultimately those policies really have to move.” He also promised that the New Hampshire Department of Education “will move any of the remaining districts to get their policies where they need to be to ensure that everyone can attend school without a mask.”
In a statement explaining the reason for his veto of the House- and Senate-supported legislation proposing a ban on school mask mandates, Sununu said it’s important to preserve local governments’ decision-making authority.
“Just because we may not like a local decision, does not mean we should remove their authority,” Sununu said in a statement. “One of the State’s foremost responsibilities is to know the limits of its power. As Granite Staters, we take pride in local control and our bottom-up approach to education. Similar to our fight to retain states’ rights against a bloated and ever-encroaching federal government, we have a responsibility to ensure the State minimizes its infringement on local control.”
JR Hoell, a founder of the Republican political watchdog group RebuildNH, told The Epoch Times that he finds Sununu’s position to be hypocritical.
“For someone who single-handedly ruled the entire state via executive fiat for over a year, issued 21 consecutive executive orders regulating every public and private entity, to then say that one of the foremost responsibilities of a state is to know its limit of power is the ultimate in hypocrisy,” said Hoell, who’s also a former state representative.
Sununu has had his share of political conflicts. Earlier this year, he was accused by Republican party leaders of orchestrating the arrest of eight citizens who had previously protested his push for the state to take federal money to promote the COVID-19 vaccine.
Nationally, Sununu won criticism among party pundits for calling former President Donald Trump “[expletive] crazy.”
However, according to a recent poll, the three-term governor, who’s up for reelection this year, remains one of the most popular governors in the United States.
A consultancy firm advised by former “Ministry of Truth” Director Nina Jankowicz received a federally funded contract to combat the spread of alleged disinformation in the U.S. Air Force, The National Pulse can reveal.
The company, the Alethea Group, was founded in 2019 and purports to defend its clients from “disinformation campaigns.”
Jankowicz became the Alethea Group’s Director of External Engagement in September of 2021, remarking at the time: “I’m thrilled to lead Alethea’s external-facing research to continue to educate the public about the impact of disinformation on public safety, public health, and the functioning of global democracies.”
Just months after Jankowicz joined the Alethea Group, the company scored its first federal contract through the AFWERX program, dubbed the “the venture capital fund of the Air Force.” The firm was awarded an AFWERX Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase I contract “to help the Air Force detect and mitigate instances of disinformation and misinformation,” according to a company press release.
“Artemis, Alethea Group’s machine learning platform, will be used to enable Air Force decision makers to proactively counter-message disinformation narratives in a way that’s appropriate for a government use-case.”
“Adversaries are finding the use of disinformation to be more effective in influencing behavior and have targeted the US military, Service members, Veterans, and their families,” explained an Alethea Group representative, who added:
“Narratives and false information resulting from disinformation have negative consequences for the military ranging from heightened political tensions that cause divisions between Service members, to lower COVID vaccination rates, to violence and offline action inspired by conspiracy theories.”
Established by Congress in 1982, the AFWERX SBIR program is supported by eleven federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, and is intended to adapt commercial technology to U.S. Air Force needs.
The unearthed contract follows the Biden White House pausing its plans to create a Disinformation Governance Board at the Department of Homeland Security, which would have been led by Jankowicz. Despite Jankowicz exiting the role shortly after it was announced, it appears the Alethea Group’s AFWERX contract is still active, allowing the firm to receive federal funds and advise the U.S. military on what constitutes “disinformation.”
Canadian immunologist and vaccine researcher Byram Bridle, Ph.D., has gained access to Pfizer’s biodistribution study from the Japanese regulatory agency. The research demonstrates a huge problem with all COVID-19 vaccines
The assumption that vaccine developers have been working with is that the mRNA in the vaccines would primarily remain in and around the vaccination site. Pfizer’s data, however, show the mRNA and subsequent spike protein are widely distributed in the body within hours
This is a serious problem, as the spike protein is a toxin shown to cause cardiovascular and neurological damage. It also has reproductive toxicity, and Pfizer’s biodistribution data show it accumulates in women’s ovaries
Once in your blood circulation, the spike protein binds to platelet receptors and the cells that line your blood vessels. When that happens, it can cause platelets to clump together, resulting in blood clots, and/or cause abnormal bleeding
Pfizer documents submitted to the European Medicines Agency also show the company failed to follow industry-standard quality management practices during preclinical toxicology studies and that key studies did not meet good laboratory practice standards
The more we learn about the COVID-19 vaccines, the worse they look. In a recent interview[1] with Alex Pierson (above), Canadian immunologist and vaccine researcher Byram Bridle, Ph.D., dropped a shocking truth bomb that immediately went viral, despite being censored by Google.
It also was featured in a “fact” check by The Poynter Institute’s Politifact,[2] which pronounced Bridle’s findings as “false” after interviewing Dr. Drew Weissman,[3] a UPenn scientist who is credited with helping to create the technology that enables the COVID mRNA vaccines to work. But, as you can see below, unlike Bridle, Politifact neglected to go beyond interviewing someone with such a huge stake in the vaccine’s success.
In 2020, Bridle was awarded a $230,000 government grant for research on COVID vaccine development. As part of that research, he and a team of international scientists requested a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) access to Pfizer’s biodistribution study from the Japanese regulatory agency. The research,[4] [5]previously unseen, demonstrates a huge problem with all COVID-19 vaccines.
“We made a big mistake,” Bridle says. “We thought the spike protein was a great target antigen; we never knew the spike protein itself was a toxin and was a pathogenic protein. So, by vaccinating people we are inadvertently inoculating them with a toxin.”
Pfizer Omitted Industry-Standard Safety Studies
What’s more, TrialSite News reports[6] that Pfizer documents submitted to the European Medicines Agency [EMA] reveal the company “did not follow industry-standard quality management practices during preclinical toxicology studies … as key studies did not meet good laboratory practice (GLP).”
Neither reproductive toxicity nor genotoxicity (DNA mutation) studies were performed, both of which are considered critical when developing a new drug or vaccine for human use. The problems now surfacing matter greatly, as they significantly alter the risk-benefit analysis underlying the vaccines’ emergency use authorization. As reported by TrialSite News:[7]
“Recently, there has been speculation regarding potential safety signals associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Many different unusual, prolonged, or delayed reactions have been reported, and often these are more pronounced after the second shot.
Women have reported changes in menstruation after taking mRNA vaccines. Problems with blood clotting (coagulation) — which are also common during COVID-19 disease — are also reported. In the case of the Pfizer COVID mRNA vaccine, these newly revealed documents raise additional questions about both the genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity risks of this product.
Standard studies designed to assess these risks were not performed in compliance with accepted empirical research standards. Furthermore, in key studies designed to test whether the vaccine remains near the injection site or travels throughout the body, Pfizer did not even use the commercial vaccine (BNT162b2) but instead relied on a ‘surrogate’ mRNA producing the luciferase protein.
These new disclosures seem to indicate that the U.S. and other governments are conducting a massive vaccination program with an incompletely characterized experimental vaccine.
It is certainly understandable why the vaccine was rushed into use as an experimental product under emergency use authority, but these new findings suggest that routine quality testing issues were overlooked in the rush to authorize use.
People are now receiving injections with an mRNA gene therapy-based vaccine, which produces the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in their cells, and the vaccine may be also delivering the mRNA and producing spike protein in unintended organs and tissues (which may include ovaries).”
Toxic Spike Protein Enters Blood Circulation
The assumption that vaccine developers have been working with is that the mRNA in the vaccines (or DNA in the case of Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca’s vaccines) would primarily remain in and around the vaccination site, i.e., your deltoid muscle, with a small amount draining into local lymph nodes.[8]
Pfizer’s data, however, show this isn’t the case at all. Using mRNA programmed to produce luciferase protein, as well as mRNA tagged with a radioactive label, Pfizer showed that the majority of the mRNA initially remain near the injection site, but within hours become widely distributed within the body.[9]We have known for a long time that the spike protein is a pathogenic protein. It is a toxin. It can cause damage in our body if it gets into circulation.— Dr. Byram Bridle
The mRNA enters your bloodstream and accumulates in a variety of organs, primarily your spleen, bone marrow, liver, adrenal glands and, in women, the ovaries. The spike protein also travel to your heart, brain and lungs, where bleeding and or blood clots can occur as a result, and is expelled in breast milk.
This is a problem, because rather than instructing your muscle cells to produce the spike protein (the antigen that triggers antibody production), spike protein is actually being produced inside your blood vessel walls and various organs, where it can do a great deal of damage.
“It’s the first time ever scientists have been privy to seeing where these messenger RNA [mRNA] vaccines go after vaccination,” Bridle told Pierson.[10]
“Is it a safe assumption that it stays in the shoulder muscle? The short answer is: absolutely not. It’s very disconcerting … We have known for a long time that the spike protein is a pathogenic protein.
It is a toxin. It can cause damage in our body if it gets into circulation … The spike protein on its own is almost entirely responsible for the damage to the cardiovascular system, if it gets into circulation.”
The Spike Protein Is the Problem
Indeed, for many months, we’ve known that the worst symptoms of severe COVID-19, blood clotting problems in particular, are caused by the spike protein of the virus. As such, it seemed really risky to instruct the body’s cells to produce the very thing that causes severe problems.
Bridle cites research showing that laboratory animals injected with purified spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 straight into their bloodstream developed cardiovascular problems and brain damage.
Assuming that the spike protein would not enter into the circulatory system was a “grave mistake,” according to Bridle, who calls the Japanese data “clear-cut evidence” that the vaccine, and the spike protein produced by it, enters your bloodstream and accumulates in vital organs. Bridle also cites recent research showing the spike protein remained in the bloodstream of humans for 29 days.
Once in your blood circulation, the spike protein binds to platelet receptors and the cells that line your blood vessels. As explained by Bridle, when that happens, one of several things can occur:
It can cause platelets to clump together — Platelets, aka thrombocytes, are specialized cells in your blood that stop bleeding. When there’s blood vessel damage, they clump together to form a blood clot. This is why we’ve been seeing clotting disorders associated with both COVID-19 and the vaccines
It can cause abnormal bleeding
In your heart, it can cause heart problems
In your brain, it can cause neurological damage
Importantly, people who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 absolutely should not donate blood, seeing how the vaccine and the spike protein are both transferred. In fragile patients receiving the blood, the damage could be lethal.
Breastfeeding women also need to know that both the vaccine and the spike protein are being expelled in breast milk, and this could be lethal for their babies. You are not transferring antibodies. You are transferring the vaccine itself, as well as the spike protein, which could result in bleeding and/or blood clots in your child. All of this also suggests that for individuals who are at low risk for COVID-19, children and teens in particular, the risks of these vaccines far outweigh the benefits.
The Spike Protein and Blood Clotting
In related news, Dr. Malcolm Kendrick posted an article[11] on his website June 3, 2021, in which he discusses the links between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and vasculitis, a medical term referring to inflammation (“itis”) in your vascular system, which is made up of your heart and blood vessels.
There are many different types of vasculitis, including Kawasaki’s disease, antiphospholipid syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma and Sjogren’s disease. According to Kendrick, all of them have two things in common:[12]
1.Your body for some reason starts to attack the lining of your blood vessels, thereby causing damage and inflammation — The “why” can differ from one case to another, but in all cases, your immune system identifies something foreign in the lining of the blood vessel, causing it to attack. The attack causes damage to the lining, which results in inflammation.
Blood clots are a common result, and can occur either because the platelets clump together in response to the vessel wall damage, or because your anticlotting mechanism has been compromised. Your most powerful anticlotting system is your glycocalyx, the protective layer of glycoproteins that lines your blood vessels.
Among many other things, the glycocalyx contains a wide variety of anticoagulant factors, including tissue factor inhibitor, protein C, nitric oxide and antithrombin. It also modulates the adhesion of platelets to the endothelium. When blood clots completely block a blood vessel, you end up with a stroke or a heart attack.
A reduction in platelet count, known as thrombocytopenia, is a reliable sign that blood clots are forming in your system, as the platelets are being used up in the process. Thrombocytopenia is a commonly-reported side effect of COVID-19 vaccines, as are blood clots, strokes and lethal heart attacks — all of which are pointing toward spike proteins causing vascular damage.
2.They significantly increase your risk of death, in some cases raising mortality by 50 times compared to people who do not have these conditions.
The take-home message Kendrick delivers is that “If you damage the lining of blood vessel walls, blood clots are far more likely to form. Very often, the damage is caused by the immune system going on the attack, damaging blood vessel walls, and removing several of the anti-clotting mechanisms.” The end result can be lethal, and this chain of events is exactly what these COVID-19 vaccines are setting into motion.
SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein May Damage Mitochondrial Function
Other research suggests the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can have a serious impact on your mitochondrial function, which is imperative for good health, innate immunity and disease prevention of all kinds.
When the spike protein interacts with the ACE2 receptor, it can disrupt mitochondrial signaling, thereby inducing the production of reactive oxygen species and oxidative stress. If the damage is serious enough, uncontrolled cell death can occur, which in turn leaks mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) into your bloodstream.[13]
Aside from being detected in cases involving acute tissue injury, heart attack and sepsis, freely circulating mtDNA has also been shown to contribute to a number of chronic diseases, including systemic inflammatory response syndrome or SIRS, heart disease, liver failure, HIV infection, rheumatoid arthritis and certain cancers.[14] As explained in “COVID-19: A Mitochondrial Perspective”:[15]
“Apart from its role in energy production, mitochondria are crucial for … innate immunity, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, and apoptosis; all of these are important in COVID-19 pathogenesis. Dysfunctional mitochondria predispose to oxidative stress and loss of cellular function and vitality. In addition, mitochondrial damage leads to … inappropriate and persistent inflammation.
SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) … enters cell by attaching to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors on cell surface … Following infection, there is internalization and downregulation of ACE2 receptors.
At vascular endothelium, ACE2 performs conversion of angiotensin II to angiotensin (1–7). Thus, a low ACE2 activity subsequent to SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to imbalance in renin-angiotensin system with relative excess of angiotensin II.
Angiotensin II through binding to its type 1 receptors exerts pro-inflammatory, vasoconstrictive, and prothrombotic effects, while angiotensin (1–7) has opposing effects … In addition, angiotensin II increases cytoplasmic and mitochondrial ROS generation leading to oxidative stress.
Increased oxidative stress may lead to endothelial dysfunction and aggravate systemic and local inflammation, thus contributing to acute lung injury, cytokine storm, and thrombosis seen in severe COVID-19 illness …
A recent algorithm showed that majority of SARS-CoV-2 genomic and structural RNAs are targeted for mitochondrial matrix. Thus it appears that SARS-CoV-2 hijacks mitochondrial machinery for its own benefit, including DMV biogenesis. Manipulation of mitochondria by virus may lead to mitochondrial dysfunction and increased oxidative stress ultimately leading to loss of mitochondrial integrity and cell death …
Mitochondrial fission enables removal of the damaged portion of a mitochondrion to be cleared by mitophagy (a special form of autophagy). Metabolomic studies suggest that SARS-CoV-2 inhibits mitophagy. Thus, there is accumulation of damaged and dysfunctional mitochondria. This not only leads to impaired MAVS [mitochondrial antiviral signaling] response but also aggravates inflammation and cell death.”
The author, Pankaj Prasun, points out that the virus’ impact on mitochondria helps explain why COVID-19 is so much deadlier for older people, the obese, and those with diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease.
All of these risk factors have something in common: They’re all associated with mitochondrial dysfunction. If your mitochondria are already dysfunctional, the SARS-CoV-2 virus can more easily knock out more mitochondria, resulting in severe illness and death.
The Spike Protein Is a Bioweapon
In my interview with Seneff and Mikovits, they both stressed that the key danger — both in COVID-19 and with the vaccines — is the spike protein itself. However, while the spike protein found in the virus is bad, the spike protein your body produces in response to the vaccine is far worse. Why?
Because the synthetic mRNA in the vaccine has been programmed to instruct your cells to produce an unnatural, genetically engineered spike protein. Specific alterations make it far more toxic than that found on the virus itself. Mikovits goes so far as to call the spike protein a bioweapon, as it is a disease-causing agent that demolishes innate immunity and exhausts your natural killer (NK) cells’ ability to determine which cells are infected and which aren’t.
In short, when you get the COVID-19 vaccine, you are being injected with an agent that instructs your body to produce the bioweapon in its own cells. This is about as diabolical as it gets.
In summary, normally, the spike protein on a virus will collapse on itself and fall into the cell once it attaches to the ACE2 receptor. The vaccine-induced spike protein does not do this. Instead it stays open and remains attached to the ACE2 receptor, thereby disabling it and causing a host of problems that lead to heart, lung and immune impairment.
What’s more, because the RNA code has been enriched with extra guanines (Gs) and cytosines (Cs), and configured as if it’s a human messenger RNA molecule ready to make protein by adding a polyA tail, the spike protein’s RNA sequence in the vaccine looks as if it is part bacteria,[17]part human[18] and part viral at the same time.
There’s also evidence suggesting the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein may be a prion, which is yet another piece of really bad news, particularly as it pertains to vaccine-induced spike protein. Prions are membrane proteins and when they misfold, they form crystals in the cytoplasm resulting in prion disease.
Since the mRNA in the vaccines has been modified to spew out very high amounts of spike protein (far greater than that of the actual virus), the risk of excessive buildup in the cytoplasm is high. And, since the spike protein doesn’t enter into the membrane of the cell, there’s a high risk that it can become problematic if indeed it works like a prion.
Remember, the research cited by Bridle at the beginning of this article found the spike protein accumulates in the spleen, among other places. Parkinson’s disease is a prion disease that has been traced back to prions originating in the spleen, that then travel up to the brain via the vagus nerve. In the same way, it’s quite possible COVID-19 vaccines may promote Parkinson’s and other human prion diseases such as Alzheimer’s.
What Are the Solutions?
While all of this is highly problematic, there is help. As noted by Mikovits, remedies to the maladies that might develop post-vaccination include:
Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin treatments. Ivermectin appears particularly promising as it actually binds to the spike protein. Please listen to the interview that Brett Weinstein did with Dr. Pierre Kory,[19] one of Dr. Paul Marik’s collaborators
Low-dose antiretroviral therapy to reeducate your immune system
Low-dose interferons such as Paximune, developed by interferon researcher Dr. Joe Cummins, to stimulate your immune system
Peptide T (an HIV entry inhibitor derived from the HIV envelope protein gp120; it blocks binding and infection of viruses that use the CCR5 receptor to infect cells)
Cannabis, to strengthen Type I interferon pathways
Dimethylglycine or betaine (trimethylglycine) to enhance methylation, thereby suppressing latent viruses
Silymarin or milk thistle to help cleanse your liver
From my perspective, I believe the best thing you can do is to build your innate immune system. To do that, you need to become metabolically flexible and optimize your diet. You’ll also want to make sure your vitamin D level is optimized to between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL (100 nmol/L to 150 nmol/L), ideally through sensible sun exposure. Sunlight also has other benefits besides making vitamin D.
Use time-restricted eating and eat all your meals for the day within a six- to eight-hour window. Avoid all vegetable oils and processed foods. Focus on certified-organic foods to minimize your glyphosate exposure, and include plenty of sulfur-rich foods to keep your mitochondria and lysosomes healthy. Both are important for the clearing of cellular debris, including these spike proteins. You can also boost your sulfate by taking Epsom salt baths.
To combat the toxicity of the spike protein, you’ll want to optimize autophagy, which may help digest and remove the spike proteins. Time-restricted eating will upregulate autophagy, while sauna therapy, which upregulates heat shock proteins, will help refold misfolded proteins and also tag damaged proteins and target them for removal. It is important that your sauna is hot enough (around 170 degrees Fahrenheit) and does not have high magnetic or electric fields.
Michigan Democrat ended her salary sacrifice even as her pandemic restrictions dragged on
In early 2020, Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer (D.) pledged to give back a portion of her salary for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic. But she stopped after 5 months—even as her gathering and mask restrictions dragged on for more than a year.
Whitmer in April 2020 said she would “lead by example” and return 10 percent of her $159,300 salary to the state’s treasury department during the pandemic. According to state records obtained by MIRS News, however, Whitmer ended the pledge just five months later in September after cutting three checks totaling $4,917 back to the state. The Democrat’s pandemic restrictions lasted significantly longer than her self-imposed pay cut pledge—Whitmer limited indoor gatherings and required face masks in public for 15 months.
The revelation marks Whitmer’s latest in a long line of COVID blunders.
During the pandemic’s early stages, the Democrat issued draconian stay-at-home orders that shuttered local businesses but allowed large corporations to stay open. Whitmer also implemented a policy that required nursing homes to accept positive coronavirus patients who were discharged from hospitals, a decision that Republicans argue led to increased deaths in elderly facilities. Meanwhile, as the pandemic raged on, Whitmer broke her own COVID rules during a dinner party at a Michigan State University bar and fled the state to party maskless at a crowded Washington, D.C., cocktail joint.
“Governor Whitmer shut down the state far longer than the months she sacrificed, upending the economy and lives of Michiganders,” Michigan Rising Action executive director Eric Ventimiglia said in a statement. “Despite pledging to ‘lead by example,’ Whitmer … continued to enjoy a generous, taxpayer-funded salary.”
Whitmer’s office did not return a request for comment.
The Democrat entered the governor’s mansion in 2019 after centering her campaign on a pledge to “fix the damn roads.” More than three years into her tenure, however, Michigan’s “deteriorating” roads are costing residents nearly $5,000 a year in car repairs, an April report from national transportation research nonprofit TRIP found.
Whitmer’s infrastructure shortcomings and infamous pandemic response now have the Democrat engaged in a difficult reelection bid. According to a January Detroit News poll, just 40 percent of Michiganders would vote to reelect the Democrat. Forty-eight percent of respondents said the state is on the “wrong track,” compared with 36 percent who said it is on the “right track.”
Whitmer’s prospective GOP opponents include former Detroit Police Department head James Craig, Michigan State Police captain Mike Brown, and Detroit businessman Kevin Rinke. Republicans will nominate Whitmer’s challenger during the state’s Aug. 2 primary.
The World Economic Forum has announced a list of public figure attendees for its upcoming Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland.
Taking place May 22nd through 26th, the World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting will count 50 heads of government and thousands of corporate, philanthropic, and scientific leaders in attendance.
Twenty-five American officials, including two White House representatives, are going to the meeting. An additional 12 Democrat and 10 Republican politicians, listed below, will accompany them.
U.S. and Ukrainian attendees outnumber those coming from other leading nations, which includes just three from the United Kingdom, France, and Germany respectively.
The names of U.S. delegates appear below, with a full list of public figure attendees in the embedded spreadsheet following.
American Attendees of the World Economic Forum 2022:
Gina Raimondo Secretary of Commerce of USA
John F. Kerry Special Presidential Envoy for Climate of the United States of America
Bill Keating Congressman from Massachusetts (D)
Daniel Meuser Congressman from Pennsylvania (R)
Madeleine Dean Congresswoman from Pennsylvania (D)
Ted Lieu Congressman from California (D)
Ann Wagner Congresswoman from Missouri (R)
Christopher A. Coons Senator from Delaware (D)
Darrell Issa Congressman from California (R)
Dean Phillips Congressman from Minnesota (D)
Debra Fischer Senator from Nebraska (R)
Eric Holcomb Governor of Indiana (R)
Gregory W. Meeks Congressman from New York (D)
John W. Hickenlooper Senator from Colorado (D)
Larry Hogan Governor of Maryland (R)
Michael McCaul Congressman from Texas (R)
Pat Toomey Senator from Pennsylvania (R)
Patrick J. Leahy Senator from Vermont (D)
Robert Menendez Senator from New Jersey (D)
Roger F. Wicker Senator from Mississippi (R)
Seth Moulton Congressman from Massachusetts (D)
Sheldon Whitehouse Senator from Rhode Island (D)
Ted Deutch Congressman from Florida (D)
Francis Suarez Mayor of Miami (R)
Al Gore Vice-President of the United States (1993-2001) (D)
“The Annual Meeting 2022 will embody the World Economic Forum’s philosophy of collaborative, multistakeholder impact, providing a unique collaborative environment in which to reconnect, share insights, gain fresh perspectives, and build problem-solving communities and initiatives,” explains the group, whose efforts to exploit COVID-19 for its “Great Reset” has come under intense scrutiny.
“Against a backdrop of deepening global frictions and fractures, it will be the starting point for a new era of global responsibility and cooperation,” posits the WEF, which selected “history at a turning point” as its event’s primary theme.
The event focuses on eight key areas: Climate and Nature; Fairer Economies; Tech and Innovation; Jobs and Skills; Better Business; Health and Healthcare; Global Cooperation; and Society and Equity. Panel discussions include “Economic Weaponry: Uses and Effectiveness of Sanctions,” “Safeguarding Global Scientific Collaboration,” “Blue Foods for a Sustainable Future,” “The Journey towards Racial Equity”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will also be giving a special welcome address on the opening day of that event and will be followed by executives from companies such as COVID-19 vaccine maker Pfizer.
The event also counts dozens of corporate and philanthropic partners, including Alibaba Group, which is a key component of the Chinese Communist Party’s social credit score system, Google, Amazon, AstraZeneca, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, BlackRock, George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, Meta, Johnson & Johnson, Huawei Technologies, Pfizer, and the Wellcome Trust.
Accused of racism by an incoming McKinsey consultant, bar bent over backwards to appease Brown’s diversity commissars
Students at Brown University extracted an apology from a blue-collar bar after a soon-to-be McKinsey consultant accused its employees of racism, prompting a student boycott and a shakedown from the school’s diversity office.
The Graduate Center Bar apologized on April 27 for removing three black students who were roughhousing in line, after one of the students, Okezie Okoro, confronted the bouncer who told them to knock it off. The confrontation took place on April 7 and occurred after the bouncer let them inside. When Okoro gave the bouncer grief for reprimanding his friends, an argument ensued, culminating in the students’ ejection from the bar.
A week later, Okoro posted on social media a 2,000-word denunciation of the bar, replete with a “content warning” and a list of demands. The post accused the bouncer of racism and attacked the bar’s manager, Susan Yund, for dismissing that accusation.
“When we students voice concerns that someone has been harmed,” Okoro wrote, “we expect at the very least a response that attempts to deepen understanding.”
The bar capitulated, sending Okoro a fawning apology that outlined the steps it was taking “to be diverse, queer, and safe for all.”
“We should have had policies in place that would have made you feel safer and heard when you took issue with the situation,” the bar told Okoro. “We should have engaged with you more respectfully, patiently, and compassionately when you disagreed with us.”
Okoro, a senior at Brown University and the president of the school’s Black Consulting Initiative, will be working as a McKinsey analyst upon graduation, according to his LinkedIn profile. Starting salaries at the prestigious consultancy typically top $100,000.
The apology, which Okoro posted on Instagram, promised “de-escalation training” and the “addition of bar cameras,” as well as updates to the bar’s harassment policies. Those commitments came six months after the bar reopened with reduced capacity limits and days after the bar’s managers met with Okoro and Brown vice president for institutional equity and diversity Sylvia Carey-Butler, according to the Brown Daily Herald.
Housed in the basement of an undergraduate dormitory, the bar is run by blue-collar locals and depends on the university for survival. It requested the sit-down amid a student boycott organized by Okoro, who told the Daily Herald he hoped his campaign would be “restorative.”
Okoro, Carey-Butler, and the Graduate Center Bar did not respond to requests for comment.
The episode is the latest example of how privileged students weaponize race against less privileged service workers, often with the backing of college administrators. At Smith College, a janitor was placed on leave after he called security on a black student eating lunch in a closed dorm. At Oberlin College, students and faculty protested a local bakery for calling the police on a black shoplifter who’d assaulted a clerk. The protests led to Oberlin suspending its purchasing agreement with the bakery—and to a lawsuit that forced the college to pay $11 million in damages.
That sort of riposte seems unlikely for the Graduate Center Bar, which is still reeling from the pandemic. Because the bar rents space from the university, it is required to comply with Brown’s COVID restrictions, some of the strictest in the Ivy League. The university closed the bar in March 2020 and did not let it reopen until November 2021, by which point vaccines had been available for almost a year. Several bartenders filed for unemployment while the bar was closed, the Daily Heraldreported.
It is unclear how rowdy Okoro was being in line: Though the future McKinsey analyst claims he was “play-fighting (without physical contact),” Yund said the antics went beyond “merely tapping each other on the shoulder.”
“In the narrow hallway that is the GCB’s entrance it can be dangerous if people are moving their arms or elbows around unexpectedly,” she emailed Okoro after the incident. “We know this from experience.”
That didn’t satisfy Okoro, who ridiculed Yund’s email in his post. The bouncer’s reaction, he said, “was a manifestation of respectability politics and shows how black people often have to withhold from expression in order to comfort and conform.”
It could also show that the bar takes safety seriously. Rhode Island has one of the strictest fire codes in the nation, the legacy of a nightclub fire that killed 100 people and injured 230 more. Since the bar is tucked away in a basement, alums told the Washington Free Beacon, it enforces strict capacity limits and generally has a long line, which requires careful crowd control in the cramped corridors of the dorm. Pictures of the bar posted on Brown’s website confirm the tight confines.
The boycott began on April 13 and lasted a week and half. Okoro’s Instagram post announcing it was shared over 700 times, he told the Daily Herald, suggesting a number of students participated in the boycott.
But on other social media platforms, Okoro’s demands met with derision—especially his call for the “indefinite suspension of the door person” who told him to cut it out.
“Imagine very reasonably being kicked from a bar bc you’re dicking around and then being an ass about it…then using your bruised ego to try to get a working class Brown employee fired,” one user posted on Dear Blueno, an anonymous message board for Brown students. “You literally are pissed that you got corrected in public and now you wanna fuck up this guy’s life over it?”
“Why argue with the bouncer after getting let in?” another user asked. “That would get you thrown out of most bars. Either the kid is an idiot, or he caused a scene because he wants to be the center of attention.”
Okoro nonetheless demanded an “apology to the affected students,” which he described as “an integral step to rectifying the harm committed.” That harm, Okoro said, was nothing short of existential.
“As a fourth-year black student, with significant academic and extracurricular engagement at Brown, it is discouraging to experience this in a Brown University space,” Okoro wrote. “My investment in and experience at the school can go unrecognized and erased, revealing the only thing that matters: my blackness.”
President Joe Biden’s administration is pushing amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) governing regulations to give Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus unilateral authority to declare a public health emergency in any nation based on whatever evidence he chooses.
The proposed U.S. amendments were forwarded to the WHO in January for consideration next week by the UN’s 75th World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.
In a Jan. 26 letter to a virtual meeting of WHO’s executive board, Loyce Pace, Assistant Secretary for Global Affairs of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) described “the importance of equity and equitable access to medical countermeasures and the negative impacts of misinformation and disinformation related to the pandemic. We agree that we must all do better.
World Health Organization (WHO) director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus adjusts his glasses during a meetin in front of the WHO headquarters in Geneva on May 29, 2021. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
“The United States led an inclusive and transparent process to develop this decision, as we are mindful that updating and modernizing the IHR [International Health Regulations] are critical to ensuring the world is better prepared for and can respond to, the next pandemic.”
Among the proposed U.S. amendments, one removes an existing requirement in Section 9 that WHO “consult with and seek to obtain verification” from officials in a nation in which a health crisis is suspected before making any public declarations. The same amendment provides that “WHO may take into account reports from sources other than notifications or consultations” from the nation with the suspected problem.
A proposed change to Section 5 would direct WHO to establish “early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources.”
A proposed amendment to Section 10 requires that the WHO, in the event the nation with the suspected problem doesn’t cooperate within 48 hours, shall “when justified by the magnitude of the public health risk, immediately share with other [nations] the information available to it.”
Nowhere do the amendments or accompanying documents explain how or why U.S. public health officials believe the equity issue in health care would be addressed by giving Tedros the authority to declare a public health emergency on the basis of information provided by a source other than the affected nation.
President Joe Biden speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on March 8, 2022. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
A search of the White House Press Office website found only one veiled reference to the WHO amendments. That reference was in a Feb. 2 Fact Sheet issued by the White House saying the U.S. “will continue to advance health security and pandemic preparedness abroad, including through strengthening WHO, working with partners towards targeted IHR amendments.”
The proposed amendment Section 5 of the WHO regulations also appears to parallel the Biden administration’s reference in a fact sheet on its proposed 2023 federal budget that was issued in April.
That reference commits the Biden administration to support “global threat detection innovations through a globally connected network of public health surveillance systems that optimizes disease prevention and health promotion as we strengthen surveillance initiatives to provide necessary actionable data before, during, and after a pandemic.”
“The budget includes $2.47 billion in mandatory funding for CDC to include enhancements to domestic sentinel surveillance programs, expansion of domestic and global wastewater surveillance, and investments in global genomic surveillance approaches, as well as global respiratory disease surveillance platforms,” the fact sheet states.
Respiratory surveillance platforms include video cameras and recorders that alert authorities when members of the public are seen coughing or otherwise acting in a manner that could indicate the presence of an infectious disease or help spread one already present in a population. Such equipment is widely used in China.
The Biden WHO amendments are the latest step in the current president’s efforts to reintegrate the U.S. with WHO after his predecessor, President Donald Trump, slashed U.S. funding to the international health organization and then gave notice of U.S. withdrawal.
A man uses an oxygen mask at a hospital during a sandstorm in Baghdad, Iraq, May 5, 2022. REUTERS/Alaa Al-Marjani
One of Biden’s first acts as president was to withdraw Trump’s withdrawal notice and to restore U.S. funding, which accounts for half of WHO’s budget. Trump’s dissatisfaction with WHO stemmed from what he saw as the international health organization’s excessive deference to China regarding the origin of the CCP virus, which causes COVID-19.
A White House spokesman didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ request for information on the amendments and the administration’s rationale for the proposals. An HHS spokesman also didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.
Critics of the amendments such as Dr. Peter Breggin, however, have not been reluctant to comment on the proposed amendments.
“The amendments would give WHO the right to take important steps to collaborate with other nations and other organizations worldwide to deal with any nation’s alleged health crisis, even against its stated wishes,” Breggin said in a May 4 post under a byline shared with his wife, Ginger Ross Breggin.
“The power to declare health emergencies is a potential tool to shame, intimidate, and dominate nations. It can be used to justify ostracism and economic or financial actions against the targeted nation by other nations aligned with WHO or who wish to harm and control the accused nation,” Breggin wrote.
Peter Breggin is a Harvard-trained psychiatrist, former U.S. Public Health Service officer, and former National Institute on Mental Health (NIMH) consultant. Ginger Ross Breggin is a journalist, author, and medical reform advocate.
Then-director of NIH Francis Collins at the National Institutes of Health, in Bethesda, Maryland, on Jan. 26, 2021. (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
Travis Weber, vice president for policy and government affairs at the Washington, D.C.-based Family Research Council, told The Epoch Times that “the American people need to express concern with the White House, especially as our president representing us on the world stage—we need an explanation of what you are doing here and why.”
Weber said Biden administration officials have “not really talked about this, so we need reporters to ask them at a press conference what are they proposing and really get them to explain it. People can express their concern about that to the White House and express concern to their members of Congress, and we need Members of Congress to challenge the administration to explain themselves. Part one of this is: ‘What is going on, what are you proposing, and why.’”
Similarly, Mat Staver, founder and chairman of the Florida-based Liberty Counsel public interest law firm, told The Epoch Times that if the U.S. decided not to cooperate with WHO on a possible health emergency, and “say you had Trump back in office who wants to pull out, or you have somebody else who doesn’t want to deal with WHO, they could bring it before the International Court at the Hague for fines or some other form of restriction. They could coordinate with their other member nations to take actions with regards to supplies, sharing data or other documentation for trade, and who knows what the consequences of that would be.”
Liberty Counsel also pointed out in a statement on May 12 that a UN report claimed in May 2021 that the pandemic would have been avoided had the international health organization had greater authority.
That report also recommended that WHO be given “an adaptable incentive regime, [including] sanctions such as public reprimands, economic sanctions, or denial of benefits” to nations that don’t cooperate with it.
Figure 1. Red dot below error bar = vax works. Red dot above error bar = vax likely causes harm. Red dot inside the error bar = Insufficient evidence to justify taking a new, unproven vaccine. Conclusion: Vaccine shouldn’t be considered unless there is a clear benefit. 60 and older seems to justify use based on the data we have so far. Limitations: we are waiting for others to confirm / challenge the analysis. See text34 for more info. Joel Smalley did the analysis.
