Sources from within the WHO state that they believe time is of the essence if we are to have any chance of proving the origins of the COVID-19 virus.

Sources from within the World Health Organization state that they believe time is of the essence if the world is to have any chance of getting to the bottom of the origins of the COVID-19 virus.

The WHO is putting together a team of 20 experts together with the stated goal of figuring out the origins of the pandemic. There are concerns that time is running out for an investigation like this, or that it could already be too late.

According to Fox News, a WHO spokesperson said that the team will need “data and access in the country where the first reports were identified,” which is China.

“China still holds all the cards, the WHO lacks power and it’s inconceivable to me that a new committee will be able to negotiate access to China…This is building a beautiful committee with nowhere to go,” Lawrence Gostin, the Director of Faculty for Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global and Health Law, said.

Klon Kitchen, a former officer for the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence, said that transparency on the part of the Chinese government at this point is highly unlikely.

“China is highly incentivized and capable of denying us this information,” Kitchen said. “They’re incentivized to deny us this information because no matter what it is – whether it was a wet market or a biological facility as its origin – it’s embarrassing to the Chinese Communist Party.”

The Biden administration has consistently trusted the World Health Organization and their efforts to investigate the origins of the virus. “The President believes there needs to be an independent investigation, one that’s run by the international community. It’s an international pandemic that has killed hundreds of thousands of people around the world,” said White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki in May.

“He believes the Chinese need to do more to put forward data, to be more transparent. And in the second phase of this effort, he’s certainly hopeful that will be the case, and he believes that every theory should be explored through that process but that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions before that data and that information is made available.”

President Trump had pulled out of the World Health Organization in the spring of 2020 after the emergence of the virus, and what his administration believed to be excessive deference by the WHO to Chinese interests.

It was in February 2020 that Biden said “…were I president now, I would not be taking China’s word for it,” saying that he “would insist that China allow our scientists in to make a hard determination of how it started, where it’s from, how far along it is.”

https://thepostmillennial.com/who-warns-time-is-running-out-to-investigate-the-origins-of-covid-19?utm_campaign=64487

I seem to have been fortunate enough to stumble upon the latest vaccine shaming “copy and paste” post some people have decided to share on social media. If you’re vaccinated, good for you. If you’re not vaccinated, good for you. I honestly don’t care what you do with your body because the only person I have any control over is myself.

That being said, I’m honestly tired of staying silent while everybody else, including Joe Biden, go off on their tangents.

You’re vaccinated, and you don’t know what’s in it? You don’t know what’s in hot dogs or treatments for cancer, AIDS, MS, etc.? You don’t know what’s in Tylenol and Ibuprofen and tattoo ink and shampoo and your food? Well, the great thing about living in the information technology age is a lot of that information is available right at your fingertips, presuming of course it hasn’t been censored. We live in a time where we have the ability to know a lot of things that we didn’t know before. There may be a lot of things you don’t know right now, but you have the ability and opportunity to educate yourself. If you decide not to take the time, that’s your business. But that also makes you incredibly lazy and ignorant.

Life is short. And it passes quickly and can change on a dime. I believe all of us still have a lot of things we want to do in this life and experiences we want to share. Places we want to go. People we want to see.

If you seriously think the answer is shaming people who HAVE done their research into getting injected with something that isn’t even a vaccine is going to allow you to get your life back, you’re wrong.

The problem is, we’ve been putting our lives on hold for almost 19 months now. We’ve listened to the science. We kept our kids home from school for a year. We shut down businesses, some forever. We closed our churches, our parks, our gyms, our hiking trails, our beaches, pretty much everything. Obesity of U.S. children increased among 5- through 11-year-olds from 36.2 percent to 45.7 percent. Where’s the outcry over that? How about the excess consumption of processed sugars like high-fructose corn syrup? Where’s your passport for being allowed to be a parent or a human being for that matter? Maybe it’s time for you to remedy that for your fellow man.

And yet some still keep believing the next hurdle you jump over will get you back to your normal lives. But the goalposts keeps moving!

Guess what? You can’t comply your way back to freedom. This will never end if we keep submitting to the latest and greatest “scientific suggestion” that’s being forced on us. Label me a conspiracy theorist? I don’t care. The stats are in my favor as I’m currently at about 50-0 as far as how things are going down. If anything, I identify as a walking spoiler alert.

Personally, I’m appalled and offended that certain people in certain occupations are having to choose between getting injected with an experimental gene therapy (yes, that’s what your “vaccine” is, read the FDA “approval”), or lose their jobs, livelihoods and ability to support their families. It’s abhorrent to think in order to have a place in society, we’d have to inject ourselves with this and show proof to anyone and everyone. I’m sure the Germans in the 1930s allowed fear and division to make them think what was being done to the Jews was fair and justified as well. It’s taken almost 90 years for history to repeat itself. The Nuremberg Code is still in effect and these people enforcing these mandates are in violation of it.

Are these hospitals seriously going to fire nurses and doctors for NOT getting a vaccine in the middle of a pandemic? That’ll be a sight to see. It may resemble our exit from Afghanistan! These medical professionals worked through COVID for 18 months on the frontlines and were last year’s heroes and are now deemed expendable because they don’t want to inject themselves with an experimental vaccine. How about teachers? Are we going to shut down schools again? Parents will LOVE that. Or maybe we should eliminate the teaching certification so any random person can teach our kids? In Oregon you no longer need to show proficiency in reading and math. Will that become the new standard?

I advise you all to read The Thirty Tyrants. There is a ton of corruption in this world and in our government. Our Founding Fathers NEVER meant for our representatives to make lifelong careers in Washington, DC. Some of these younger representatives show promise but if they’re there too long, it’s only a matter of time before their soul and morals obtain a price tag and they’ll be bought and sold to the Devil himself.

How is it okay for these politicians to mandate how we live our lives and lock us down and torment our kids while they go out to expensive dinners indoors unmasked nor socially distanced at The French Laundry? How is it okay to have a 60th birthday party with 600 guests when my father’s funeral was limited to 10 people? How is it acceptable to enforce mask mandates and no social gatherings and be caught at a backyard BBQ doing exactly what was mandated NOT to do? How is it acceptable to say we can’t travel while politicians are off vacationing abroad? How is it okay to close hair salons and most of us went without getting a haircut for a year when you parade maskless inside a salon you had opened especially for you?

I also advise you all to do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Turn off the news, the television and the radio. FOLLOW THE MONEY. There’s a medicine that costs 12 cents that could eradicate this virus but instead the $300 billion option is being forced on us. Stop shaming people for the decisions that they make. Stop buying in to this ridiculous rhetoric. This won’t end until we say it ends. People all over the world are starting uprisings because they have had ENOUGH.

I’ve been affected by loss from COVID. I’m not denying the reality or severity of the virus. But Fauci is not my God. Bill Gates’ software and computers get viruses all the time! What is he doing working on and funding vaccines? Ultimately, the only person who knows how many days I have left on this earth is Jesus Christ, and that’s who I’m choosing to put my faith in. Not Fauci, not Pfizer, not Moderna, or whomever else is trying to dictate how I live my life. I do not consent. I will not comply.

For those doctors and nurses who have blatantly stated they won’t treat people who aren’t vaccinated, for the nurse who posted on social media recently that they’ll mess with your ventilator if you’re not vaccinated, I’m sorry, didn’t you all take an OATH when you became licensed? It’s your duty to do your job no matter what state or condition a person is in. Those lives lost are on YOUR hands, not the unvaccinated. And for those people who say the unvaccinated deserve to die? You’re no better than the dictators and tyrants. And even with your vaccine you can still get and spread the virus so YOU also should have to submit to regular tests.

I woke up about 18 months ago. Waking up is painful and disillusioning. But honestly, walking around awake in a world that’s still asleep is more painful and creates a righteous anger inside of you. I pray every day that darkness comes to light, that the truth comes out, and most importantly that those who have committed these crimes against humanity be held accountable.

Danielle Price

Letter to the Editor: ‘You Can’t Comply Your Way Back to Freedom’ (theepochtimes.com)

It may seem too convenient to be true, but this event actually happened in 2017. The full video follows the article.

Speaking at the 2017 Consortium of Universities for Global Health conference on a panel alongside Anthony Fauci, EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak admitted his controversial “work on coronaviruses in China” was carried out with “funding through” Fauci’s National Institutes of Health agency.

The unearthed conference follows Fauci’s repeated attempts to distance his agency from the controversial New York-based non-profit, which, as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant registry shows, used the money to collaborate with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The National Pulse has previously uncovered footage of Daszak describing the viruses he manipulated as part of his “longtime” collaboration with the Chinese Communist Party-run lab as “killers.”

The 2017 event, the “Healthy People, Healthy Ecosystems” conference hosted by the Consortium of Universities for Global Health (CUGH), took place in Washington, D.C. In its description of the conference, CUGH notes that the conference supports its vision for a “world without borders”:

“CUGH believes in a world without borders, because the desire for health and well-being is universal and doesn’t change based on race, ethnicity, national, socioeconomic status, sexual identity, or geographic location.”

The conference’s unearthed agenda reveals the attendance of EcoHealth President Peter Daszak, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci, and Principal Deputy Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Anne Schuchat. The three individuals participated in a panel – “Future of Infectious Disease Pandemics: From Ebola to Zika, and Beyond” – where they discussed pandemic preparedness.

“Although much is known about how to detect and respond to existing infections, more research is needed to predict the likelihood of their emergence and spread, and to improve the precision and timeliness of public health responsiveness,” notes the panel description.

During Daszak’s presentation, given with an accompanying slideshow, he states his coronavirus work in China was carried out with “funding” from Fauci’s NIAID along with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Emerging Pandemic Threats (EPT) program:

“Working with the USAID EPT PREDICT Program and funding through NIAID to work on coronaviruses in China, we were able to test out this idea of predicting what the next emerging diseases might be. So we’ve all heard of SARS. We know that SARS is carried by civets. Well, actually, the host of SARS-like viruses, the viruses that the SARS coronavirus emerged from are bats.”

– Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance, 2017

“We worked in China to go out and do surveillance in other bat species and say how many other SARS-like viruses are there. Is there something even close to SARS? And sure enough, there was,” he adds.

Fauci-Funded Wuhan Research Relied On Human Blood Samples Provided by China’s Military.

“We’re now doing surveillance of the people and we’ve found using NIAID funding that actually there is potential of spillover into those peoples,” he reiterates while outlining the global increase of human-animal interaction.

“Even the international grants, the bulk of those funds go through U.S. organizations like ours before we send any abroad,” Daszak answers in response to a question about federal funding posed by Cornell Medicine’s Oliver Fein, who asserts “the worst virus that we presently have is the Trump administration.”

During the panel, Schuchat, a CDC official, also praises the Chinese Communist Party’s response to China’s first SARS outbreak:

“A key lesson was that cover-ups are not worth it. You may recall the Minister of Health and the Mayor of Beijing were both removed during the SARS epidemic and that being transparent and open with your situation is a lot better.”

– Principal Deputy Director of the CDC, Anne Schuchat

“Beijing did an incredible job of responding once the political level let them respond. They took over the healthcare system,” she adds.

Another panel at the event – “The Global Virome Project: A First Step Toward Ending the Pandemic Era” – featured Daszak and the Chief Scientific Officer of Metabiota, a pandemic tracking and response firm whose lead financial backer was a Hunter Biden-led investment group.

Biden served as Managing Director of Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners (RSTP), which led the company’s first round of funding worth $30 million.

The panel summary predicts that “over the coming century we will witness spillover from a pool of more than 1,000,000 “unknown” viruses into human populations”:

America Has Given Millions for ‘Research’ At Chinese Communist-Run Facilities Since COVID Outbreak.

“The frequency of pandemics is increasing, driven by surging populations, environmental change and globalized trade and travel. Disease outbreaks illustrate that we are ill-prepared to mitigate the impact of a novel virus or prevent its emergence. Only a small proportion of viral threats have been identified. Over the coming century we will witness spillover from a pool of more than 1,000,000 “unknown” viruses into human populations. A global initiative to identify and characterize every significant viral threat circulating in the world is achievable over the next ten years – a critical and essential step towards ending the pandemic era.”

Both Daszak and Fauci have repeatedly lied about the type of research occurring at the Chinese Communist Party-run lab, as a host of Fauci’s emails obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reveal the facility was carrying out “gain-of-function” research and deleted articles reveal the lab worked with live bats despite Daszak stating otherwise.

Daszak, who failed to disclose his extensive ties to the Wuhan lab and the Chinese Communist Party, was recused from the Lancet medical journal’s COVID-19 commission yet still appears on mainstream news networks.

REVEALED: Daszak Admits Fauci Funded Chinese Coronavirus Research at Conference Featuring Hunter Biden-Linked Pandemic Group. (thenationalpulse.com)

Top American health officials are ignoring or downplaying so-called natural immunity, or the protection people enjoy after recovering from COVID-19, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) told The Epoch Times.

Science the senator has reviewed, including a real-world study from Israel, indicates that natural immunity is at similar levels as or even better than vaccination. But U.S. health authorities continue urging everybody, regardless of prior infection, to get a COVID-19 jab.

“We’re ignoring natural immunity, even though the Israeli study now shows it’s 27 times more effective,” Johnson said.

That makes sense because natural immunity “recognizes the entire virus” while the vaccine was designed to prevent infection from the original form of the virus, he added.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and top health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci, have said immunity post-infection exists but is not as strong as vaccination. They have downplayed or dismissed studies like the one from Israel.

Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), said earlier this month he did not have a “firm answer” on why people who recover from COVID-19 should get a shot.

“It is true they do have protection,” he added on CNN on Sunday. But he argued that data does not yet show how durable the protection is and whether it’s affected by different variants of the CCP virus.

“I’m not denying at all that people who get infected and recover have a considerable degree of immunity. We also know—and I think we should not let this pass without saying it—that when you get infected and recover, A, you get a good degree of immunity, but, B, when you get vaccinated, you dramatically increase that protection, which is something that’s really quite good,” he said.

Asked for what informed that assertion, NIAID pointed The Epoch Times in an email to an opinion piece from June that was funded by the institute, an NPR article, Twitter posts by Scripps Research Translational Institute founder Eric Topol, and a Google search for “hybrid immunity,” a term that refers to somebody who recovered from COVID-19 and has received a vaccine.

The CDC has promoted a similar view. Director Rochelle Walensky last month cited a small Kentucky study that researchers said showed people who were vaccinated had more protection than the previously infected and that natural immunity plus vaccines were best.

But others, including some researchers, have questioned the push. Among the concerns: the focus should be on vaccinating people who don’t have natural immunity and remain unvaccinated, including people in other countries.

One of Johnson’s main concerns is the huge jump in reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a passive database run jointly by the CDC and Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Between Jan. 1, 1996, and June 30, 2021, the number of adverse events reported following administration of flu vaccines totaled 171,732. In the nine months leading up to June 30, there were over 701,000 such reports for COVID-19 vaccines.

The number of reported deaths post-COVID vaccination, meanwhile, totaled 14,925 as of Sept. 10. Reports of death following every other vaccine were 9,001.

People who have suffered side effects following vaccination “feel abandoned by the drug companies, federal health agencies, and the medical community,” Johnson wrote in a letter this year to Walensky, FDA Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock, and National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins.

Federal officials have said there’s no proven link between any of the deaths and a COVID-19 vaccine. They have added some side effect warnings to the labels of vaccines after investigating adverse event reports, including Guillain-Barré syndrome, but are still recommending virtually everybody get a jab.

The CDC still utilizes data from VAERS to evaluate vaccines but also draws from active surveillance systems. It cited data from the reporting system in April when lifting a recommended pause on Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine. Officials with the agency and the FDA regularly use the data in presentations to their respective vaccine advisory committees.

The CDC and FDA did not respond to requests for comment.

Johnson has received little information from the agencies on questions regarding natural immunity, VAERS, and other pandemic-related topics, including early treatment for COVID-19.

The pattern is one of a lack of transparency, the senator told The Epoch Times. He also denounced what he sees as health agencies not focusing enough on treatment.

Few treatments are officially sanctioned for COVID-19 some 16 months after the start of the pandemic, and one of the main ones is being rationed because there’s apparently not enough to go around.

“Had our federal health agencies devoted sufficient effort and research to help develop effective early treatment, thousands of lives could have been saved,” Johnson wrote in a recent letter.

Doctors, that the senator has spoken to, say treatments that have proven successful include vitamin C, vitamin D, and hydroxychloroquine. He plans to send a letter, with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), on behalf of a group of doctors, to regulators asking for emergency use authorization for budesonide, which has shown signs of working against COVID-19.

“We’re going to always need early treatment. We’ll always need it,” Johnson said.

Sen. Johnson: Health Agencies Are ‘Ignoring Natural Immunity’ (theepochtimes.com)

The White House and federal health officials are standing by the decision to announce the plans for COVID-19 booster shots for many Americans back in August ahead of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) and Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) approval for the extra doses.

The announcement issued by eight top government doctors on Aug. 18 notes clear evidence the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness decreases over time and reveals a plan to roll out booster shots in response. The Biden administration then laid out plans to begin giving booster shots to more Americans starting Sept. 20.

The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) met Friday morning to discuss whether booster doses will be recommended. It voted 16–3 against providing the booster for most people, but recommended it for those over 65 years old and those at high risk. The CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) will hold a two-day meeting next week to make its recommendation.

The decision to make the announcement in August has raised questions of whether the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) put undue pressure on the regulatory agencies to approve boosters by making the potential need for a third dose public.

U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy said Friday the announcement was made for two reasons: transparency and planning.

“If we saw a signal that indicated to us that protection was starting to wane and that additional shots might be required, that we would be transparent and open to the public about that,” said Vivek, adding, “You want to roll out booster shots to the population. You can’t flip a switch and make that happen overnight. There’s important planning that needs to take place.”

The White House also backed the August announcement this week when press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters: “Our objective is to be prepared should all of this process move forward. It’s always been pending the approval of the ACIP and the FDA.”

The recent resignation of top vaccine officials within the FDA seems to suggest stark disagreement within the regulatory agency on the plan to roll out booster shots. Dr. Marion Gruber, the director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, and her deputy, Dr. Philip Krause, announced late last month their plans to leave the FDA in October and November.

The two were co-authors on a paper released this week in the scientific journal The Lancet saying that booster shots may only be appropriate for certain at-risk populations.

The article reads, “although the benefits of primary COVID-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks, there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects … If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate.”

Officials say there is plenty of supply of boosters should they be approved.

White House, HHS Defend Announcing Booster Shot Plan Ahead of Approval (theepochtimes.com)

The scientific method used to govern much of popular American thinking.

In empirical fashion, scientists advised us to examine evidence and data, and then by induction come to rational hypotheses. The enemies of “science” were politics, superstition, bias, and deduction.

Yet we are now returning to our version of medieval alchemy and astrology in rejecting a millennium of the scientific method.

Take the superstitions that now surround COVID-19.

We now know from data that a prior case of COVID-19 offers immunity as robust as vaccination. Why, then, are Joe Biden’s proposed vaccination mandates ignoring that scientific fact? Dr. Anthony Fauci, when asked, seemed at a loss for words.

Is this yet another of the scientific community’s Platonic “noble lies,” as when Fauci assured the public last year that there was no need for masks? He later claimed he had lied so that medical professionals would not run out of needed supplies.

Fauci also threw out mythical percentages needed for herd immunity, apparently in an attempt to convince the public that it will never be safe until every American is protected from COVID-19 by vaccination only.

And why was it that hard for the scientific community to postulate a likely origin of COVID-19. Some of the very scientists engaged in gain-of-function research oversaw an investigation with Chinese authorities. They confirmed the predetermined conclusion that the virus likely had little to do with gain-of-function engineering. And they saw little proof it was birthed in a Wuhan virology lab. Yet scientific opinion, emerging evidence, and basic logic have suggested the opposite.

How can the government hector citizens that they have a moral duty—and soon a legal obligation—to be vaccinated when it does not mandate vaccinations for unvetted refugees flying in from Afghanistan?

How can the government medical community remain largely silent when an anticipated 2 million foreign nationals will cross into the United States in the current fiscal year—almost none of whom are vaccinated or tested for COVID-19?

Why do the media and government blame particular races for the delta variant outbreak on grounds that they were insufficiently vaccinated? Why wouldn’t officials simply urge the Latino and black communities to be vaccinated as quickly as possible? Data shows that both groups have lower vaccination rates than white and Asian populations.

Are woke political agendas discrediting science and losing public health?

We saw just that in June 2020, when more than 1,200 “health care professionals” signed a petition demanding exemptions from lockdowns and quarantines for Black Lives Matter protesters marching en masse. And they concocted medical excuses such as “vital to the national public health” to insist that violating quarantines was less unhealthy than not pouring into the streets.

Why did presidential candidate Joe Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, warn the American people on the eve of vaccination rollouts that an inoculation under the Trump administration could be unsafe, thereby undermining confidence in vaccines?

Why was the medical community largely silent about such dangerous sabotaging of new vaccines, but months later became vociferous in warning the public that any doubts about the safety of these Operation Warp Speed vaccinations were scientifically misplaced? Was there a medical breakthrough on Jan. 20, 2020, to alter their consensus?

From rewarding wokeness in medical school admissions to the peer reviewing of scientific papers, the anti-scientific mania has polluted scientific endeavors.

“Critical race theory” would preposterously tell us that we need racism to fight racism.

“Critical legal theory” ludicrously claims that laws have no rational basis but simply reflect power inequities.

“Modern monetary theory” defies millennia of evidence and basic logic in stating that governments can simply print money without worrying about balancing expenditures with revenues or inflating the currency to ruination.

Corporations are now asked to substitute a new woke agenda theory—“Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG)”—in lieu of market realities, rules of investment, and economic data.

Science is dying; superstition disguised as morality is returning. And we’ll all soon become poorer, angrier, and more divided.

The Death of Science (theepochtimes.com)

Six confirmed, 17 suspected cases is a “major public health threat” and “has the potential to seed countless U S community outbreaks,” CDC chief warns in private letter obtained by Just the News.

The head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has sent a private warning to the chief of Afghan evacuation operations that measles is spreading among refugees and poses a “major public health threat” that includes the potential for “larger imminent outbreaks” in U.S. communities already reeling from the coronavirus.

CDC Director Rochelle P. Walensky’s memo Tuesday night urged Operations Allies Welcome senior official Robert Fenton to take “urgent public health action” that includes mass vaccinations of refugees, revealing there are now six confirmed cases of measles in Afghan refugees, 17 suspected cases and hundreds of exposures in U.S. hospitals.

“The large number of unvaccinated Afghan evacuees as seen already has the potential to seed countless U.S. community outbreaks,” Walensky warned in the four-page memo obtained by Just the News.

“These outbreaks represent a major public health threat and rapid mass vaccination and expanding quarantine and isolation capacities are essential,” she stressed.

You can read the memo here: CDCMeaslesWarningFinal.pdf (Alternate Location)

She also wrote the current cases are “an indicator of potentially much larger imminent outbreaks” that could already overwhelm hospitals fighting the deadly surge of the Delta coronavirus variant.

“Immediate implementation of CDC public health standards is imperative to prevent introduction of measles into US communities and to respond to multiple concurrent measles outbreaks,” Walensky wrote.

She added, “Health care facilities are already at limited capacity as they battle the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which requires tremendous workforce in laboratory assets.”

Measles was declared eradicated from America decades ago after an aggressive vaccine campaign, and its reintroduction to U.S. communities could prove deadly to those it infects who aren’t vaccinated, officials warn.

Walensky’s memo used stark language to describe the consequences if the outbreaks aren’t thwarted soon through quarantine and vaccination campaigns.

“Failing to swiftly execute the measures outlined above will likely result in increased exposure to evacuees and personnel supporting OAW operations, including safe havens,” she wrote. “Further, evacuates who have not been vaccinated (41% of children under five years old are not currently protected against measles) pose a public health threat.”

The imminent fears of large outbreaks comes less than a week after the first measles case was detected in an Afghan refugee patient at Fort McCoy in Wisconsin. 

EXCLUSIVE: CDC warns Afghan refugees pose threat of ‘larger imminent outbreaks’ of measles in U.S. | Just The News

The immunity conferred by recovering from COVID-19 is better than the protection afforded by COVID-19 vaccines, a prominent vaccine inventor says, citing in part a recent study from Israel.

Israeli researchers found that people in the country vaccinated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot were 13 times more likely to contract the Delta variant of the CCP virus and 27 times more at risk of symptomatic disease, compared to those who had recovered from COVID-19.

“It’s now been shown in that paper and others that the breadth of that immune response in terms of T and B cell memory populations is more diverse and more long-lasting than the breadth of immune response elicited by the spike-based vaccines alone,” Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the class of vaccines based on messenger RNA, said on Epoch TV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.

“Even if we had 100% vaccine uptake with these vaccines…we would not be able to stop the spread of the virus through the US population. We would slow it.”

mRNA vaccine pioneer @RWMaloneMD breaks down the latest data on #COVID19 #Vaccines.

🔴WATCH: https://t.co/S4cd5u7i1X pic.twitter.com/GKiJJg21ZM

— American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸 with @JanJekielek (@AmThoughtLeader) September 3, 2021

While antibodies reduce over time, T cells, a type of white blood cells that protect against infection, and B cells can last for a lifetime.

Federal health authorities acknowledge natural immunity exists but have continued to claim that the protection from vaccines is better, pointing to a different set of studies, including one from Kentucky published by state and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) researchers.

Authorities continue to urge everybody, regardless of prior infection, to get a vaccine.

Some other scientists, though, say the growing body of evidence on natural immunity must play a larger role in policy discussions on vaccination amid the pandemic.

“Natural immunity is pretty darn good. We would be best to focus our efforts on people who are both unvaccinated AND have not recovered from prior infection,” Dr. Vinay Prasad, a professor at the University of California–San Francisco’s Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, wrote on social media over the weekend.

The Israeli study, Malone said, “seems to indicate that the breadth and durability of the immune response was superior with the natural infection in recovery.”

“There’s also evidence that there’s a significant—depending on the timeframe—six- to 20-fold improvement in protection from infection and disease associated with the natural immunity acquired from prior infection compared to that conferred by the vaccine.”

Malone says the newer data is a key piece in what he described as a social contract between members of the public and government health agencies.

The public “is faced with a situation where they had been told that natural immunity was not as protective, that they can’t rely on that; that if you’ve been previously infected, you should still get both doses of vaccine; that this vaccination would provide broad durable protection, it would protect you and it would protect your elders from you potentially spreading disease to them,” he said.

The CDC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The agency has told The Epoch Times in the past that it doesn’t comment on papers that aren’t authored by the agency and that officials “continually evaluate the science that leads to our guidance, and if it needs to be changed, we will base that on our own research and studies.”

Natural Immunity Longer Lasting Than Protection From COVID-19 Vaccines: Dr. Robert Malone (theepochtimes.com)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky says the federal health agency is working quickly on a COVID-19 vaccine for younger children between the ages of 5 and 11.

“We’re waiting for the companies to submit the data to the FDA, we’re anticipating that will happen in the fall,” she told the “Today Show” on Sept. 13. “We will look at that data from the FDA, from the CDC, with the urgency that we all feel for getting our kids vaccinated and we’re hoping by the end of the year.”

Her comments contrast with health advisory panels in several other countries, including the United Kingdom, that haven’t recommended COVID-19 shots for children aged 5 to 11. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted emergency authorization to vaccinate children aged 12 to 17.

Last week, FDA executives, including Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research chief Peter Marks, said in a statement that the agency will carefully look at data for younger children once it becomes available.

The officials said the FDA is then “prepared to complete its review as quickly as possible, likely in a matter of weeks rather than months,” adding that “the agency’s ability to review these submissions rapidly will depend in part on the quality and timeliness of the submissions by manufacturers.”

Should the CDC hand down a recommendation that younger children get vaccinated, it’s likely that some school districts will mandate them for in-person classes. Already, the Los Angeles Unified School District last week voted to mandate vaccines for children aged 12 and up in order to attend classes on campus.

But in other countries, some officials have noted that children have an extremely low risk of becoming seriously ill, hospitalized, or dying from COVID-19, the illness caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) earlier in September said it will take a “precautionary approach,” saying that “given this very low risk, considerations on the potential harms and benefits of vaccination are very finely balanced.”

In June, scientists from University College London, as well as the Universities of York, Bristol, and Liverpool, discovered that most children who died of COVID-19 had underlying health problems. Overall, the COVID-19 mortality rate among children is 2 deaths per 1 million children in England, they found.

“We hope this data will be reassuring for children and young people and their families,” said Dr. Elizabeth Whittaker, from the Centre for Paediatrics and Child Health and Imperial College London, reported the BBC. She said that even after the emergence of the Delta variant, it hasn’t affected the child mortality rate.

CDC Director: Agencies Urgently Working on COVID-19 Vaccine for Younger Children (theepochtimes.com)

Nebraska’s attorney general is working with other attorneys general to challenge President Joe Biden’s new COVID-19 vaccine mandates, Nebraska’s governor said Sunday.

“He’s coordinating with the other attorneys general across the country who share similar views about the overreach,” Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“This is an egregious overreach of federal authority. And as we see what these rules are, we will be able to know exactly how we will be able to challenge them in court. I’m also talking with my colleagues around the country as well, the other governors who feel the way I do, and we’ll be working on other strategies,” he added.

Biden is, through an executive order released last week, forcing federal workers to get a COVID-19 vaccine unless they are approved for a religious or medical exemption. He’s also directed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to work up an order that would require private businesses with 100 or more employees to mandate vaccination.

Ricketts, a Republican, and 18 other governors immediately condemned the mandates, arguing they were the wrong approach to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. Some governors and attorneys general indicated that they would turn to the courts.

“I will pursue every legal option available to the state of Georgia to stop this blatantly unlawful overreach by the Biden administration,” Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, wrote on social media in the wake of Biden’s announcement.

Ricketts, asked when he would be going to court, said that would come when the exact rules are laid out.

“When we get an idea of what these rules exactly will be, we’ll know how to be able to attack it in court,” he said.

Biden administration officials have defended the mandates, asserting that they’re legal and would withstand scrutiny.

“The law basically requires the Department of Labor to take action when it finds grave risk to workers,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters on Friday. “And, certainly, a pandemic that killed more than 600,000 people qualifies as a grave risk to workers.”

“The requirements that he announced are not sweeping requirements for the entire nation. These are focused on areas where the federal government has legal authority to act,” added Surgeon General Vivik Murthy on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday.

Others aren’t so sure.

Mandates of the kind Biden announced are “generally relegated to the legislature in our system of government, so I think the courts will focus on that issue first and say that the president may not have the authority to do this without congressional authorization,” Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law School professor, said over the weekend.

That’s what happened with the eviction moratorium ordered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Supreme Court blocked the latest moratorium last month, ruling the agency lacked the authority to impose such a ban and that Congress had not authorized it.

“We expect Congress to speak clearly when authorizing an agency to exercise powers of ‘vast economic and political significance,’” the majority wrote.

States Analyzing How to ‘Attack’ Biden’s Vaccine Mandates in Court: Nebraska Governor (theepochtimes.com)

Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said during a recent budget reconciliation markup meeting that he opposed an amendment proposed by Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.) that would require parental consent for schools to administer vaccines to children, with the Democrat lawmaker challenging the idea that parents always know what’s best for their kids’ health.

During the virtual meeting of the Select Committee on Education and Labor on Sept. 10, Miller argued in favor of her amendment, saying that, “parents need to have the power to make decisions on vaccines because they know what’s best for the health of their families.”

State laws establish vaccination requirements as a condition of admitting children to public daycares and schools—and in some cases also to private ones—with all states providing medical exemptions and some providing exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds. Some states, however, allow minors to decide on their own about getting vaccines, even over parental objections.

“When it comes to any medical treatment, making an informed decision is of the utmost importance. Parents know what’s best for their children, not any government body. We must protect our future generations. That’s why my amendment would restrict local education agencies from administering vaccines to children on school grounds without the consent of a parent or guardian.”

Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), a member of the select committee, came out in opposition to Miller’s amendment, saying that all states have laws that provide parents with a process to exempt children from getting vaccines, arguing further that there’s currently no legal framework that would force a vaccination without parental consent.

“This is a nonsense amendment that is in search of a problem that does not exist and I would urge my colleagues to reject it based on … it’s intended to score political points, it’s not a sincere amendment,” Takano said.

Takano’s remarks appear to overlook the fact that some states give minors the power to consent to health care decisions on their own, even over the objection of parents. According to Stateline, a publication from The Pew Charitable Trusts, indicated that around 10 states have given teenagers some rights in this regard, including around vaccines.

Following Takano’s remarks, Yarmuth also urged his colleagues to oppose the amendment, making the argument that parents don’t always know best.

“I know I’ll get in a lot of trouble for this, but I want to refer to the sponsor’s premise for the amendment, and the first words out of her mouth were, ‘parents know what’s best for their children.’ I think the evidence is compelling and overwhelming and widespread that they don’t,” Yarmuth said.

“Unfortunately, a lot of parents are misinformed and that’s why we have, literally, tens of thousands of kids now in hospitals, and suffering from this virus,” he added, referring to COVID-19.

According to a recent report by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), COVID-19 infections in children have “increased exponentially” after declining in early summer, with over 750,000 cases added between Aug. 5 and Sept. 2. Still, the report found that severe illness among children infected with the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, also known as SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen that causes COVID-19, were uncommon.

Between 0.1 percent and 1.9 percent of all child COVID-19 cases in 24 reporting states resulted in hospitalization, according to the AAP report. At the same time, among 45 states reporting data on child mortality from COVID-19, children accounted for between 0.00 percent and 0.27 percent of all COVID-19 deaths, with 7 states reported zero child deaths. Between 0.00 percent and 0.03 percent of all child COVID-19 cases resulted in death, the report said.

Yarmuth argued that Miller’s amendment and similar measures should be rejected, saying, “We need to protect kids from their parents. That is the unfortunate state of the country right now.”

Later, Miller took to Twitter to criticize Yarmuth’s remarks, insisting that, “children across our nation are being administered the vaccine without parental consent” and that, “Not surprisingly, Democrats are rejecting parental rights in favor of an all-powerful government.”

Miller’s amendment ultimately failed to win committee approval.

It comes as the Biden administration has ramped up efforts to overcome vaccine hesitancy in the face of waning vaccination rates. The White House launched a summer campaign that included offers of cash, door-to-door outreach, and recruitment of social media influencers to help spread the word and persuade more Americans to get the shot.

But those efforts have had a limited impact, with President Joe Biden turning to more aggressive measures—requiring federal employees and contractors, as well as healthcare workers at facilities that get federal funding to show proof of vaccination with no testing option.

House Democrats Oppose GOP Proposal for Schools to Require Parental Consent to Vaccinate Kids (theepochtimes.com)

Dr. Anthony Fauci, a top U.S. public health official, said that a new study regarding so-called natural immunity following COVID-19 infection is provoking discussion among government experts.

The real-world study, conducted by Israeli researchers, found that previous COVID-19 infection confers better protection against infection and hospitalization than COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was asked Friday about the research in the context of convincing people who have natural immunity, or recovered from COVID-19, to get vaccinated.

“I get calls all the time people say, ‘I’ve already had COVID, I’m protected.’ And now the study says maybe even more protected than the vaccine alone. Should they also get the vaccine? How do you make the case to them?” Dr. Sanjay Gupta asked Fauci during an appearance on CNN.

“I don’t have a really firm answer for you on that,” Fauci responded.

“That’s something that we’re going to have to discuss regarding the durability of the response. The one thing that paper from Israel didn’t tell you is whether or not—as high as the protection is with natural infection—what’s the durability compared to the durability of a vaccine? So it is conceivable that you got infected, you’re protected, but you may not be protected for an indefinite period of time,” he continued.

“So I think that is something that we need to sit down and discuss seriously because you very appropriately pointed out, it is an issue, and there could be an argument for saying what you said.”

Some experts who have studied the matter have expressed confusion as to why vaccination efforts are not focused on those who have not gotten a shot and have not recovered from COVID-19.

“We’re trying to update policy such that people who have recovered have the same privileges and access as people who are vaccinated,” Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, clinical professor of preventive medicine and medicine at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, told The Epoch Times previously.

The Israel findings, because they’re based on real-world data, even led Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieb, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, to call for natural immunity to be part of policy discussions.

“The balance of the evidence demonstrates that natural immunity confers a durable protection,” Gottlieb said during a recent television appearance.

Official guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) acknowledges people have some level of immunity after COVID-19 recovery. But the agency still recommends the vast majority of Americans get a COVID-19 vaccine, asserting the protection is even better when combining natural immunity and a jab.

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director, last month pointed to a study conducted by CDC and Kentucky researchers that suggested vaccines actually provide better protection than previous infection.

“These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections,” the agency said in a statement.

Fauci: No ‘Firm Answer’ on Why Americans Who Recovered From COVID-19 Should Get Vaccinated (theepochtimes.com)

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently revised its definition for vaccine and vaccination on one of its web pages, saying that the new definition is “more transparent” and can’t be misinterpreted.

“While there have been slight changes in wording over time to the definition of ‘vaccine’ on CDC’s website, those haven’t impacted the overall definition,” a CDC spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

“The previous definition at Immunization Basics | CDC could be interpreted to mean that vaccines are 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.”

From 2015 to Aug. 31, 2021, a vaccine was defined as “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease” and vaccination was “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”

Earlier versions of a vaccine definition also included “immunity” in its definition.

The new definition for the vaccine now reads, “A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases,” while vaccination is “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.”

While supporters of the CDC’s revision say that it’s natural to revise the definition as the science evolves, opponents say the changes have nothing to do with the evolution of science. Rather, the CDC is making the revision in response to the current COVID-19 vaccines being less effective against the Delta variant.

Emmy Award-winning investigative reporter and Epoch Times contributor Sharyl Attkisson said the new definition was made to “meet the declining ability of some of today’s ‘vaccines,’ including the COVID-19 vaccine,” adding that “after the COVID-19 vaccines were introduced, and it was discovered they do not necessarily ‘prevent disease’ or ‘provide immunity,’ CDC altered the definition of vaccines again to say that they merely ‘produce protection.’”

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) took to Twitter about the CDC’s definition change and compared it to George Orwell’s “1984,” writing, “They’ve been busy at the Ministry of Truth.”

Check out @CDCgov’s evolving definition of “vaccination.” They’ve been busy at the Ministry of Truth: pic.twitter.com/4k2xf8rvsL

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) September 8, 2021

The effectiveness of the vaccines to keep people out of the hospital had dropped to between 75 percent and 95 percent, according to CDC on Aug. 30. The health agency said the largest decline occurred in the most vulnerable group, people older than 75. However, the vaccines are still effective against severe illness.

Several studies have found that the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines is waning. An ongoing study in the United States found that the COVID-19 vaccines’ effectiveness dropped to 66 percent from 91 percent after the Delta variant became dominant in the country. A different study said so-called breakthrough infections increased to 25 percent of all infections in Los Angeles County between May 1 and July 25.

Israel, with the highest vaccination rates around the world, will administer a fourth dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to its citizens after offering a third booster shot to people 12 and older in August. The country with a population of more than 9 million and with more than 5 million fully vaccinated, is experiencing the fourth wave. More than 2.7 million Israelis have received the third dose as of Sept. 8.

The CDC’s updated definition of vaccine and vaccination is the same as in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, which had revised the words earlier this year in February to include the messenger RNA vaccines.

In January, Merriam-Webster still defined a vaccine as “a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that are administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease.”

The “older” definition of vaccine can still be found in other online dictionaries, including Oxford Languages.

“It’s also important to note that the modifications to the definition of ‘vaccine’ don’t change the fact that vaccines and the act of vaccination have prevented millions of illnesses and saved countless lives,” the CDC spokesperson said.

CDC Changes Definition of Vaccine So It Can’t Be ‘Interpreted to Mean That Vaccines Are 100% Effective’ (theepochtimes.com)

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued tighter mask guidance after a prominent teachers union pressured the agency to include more rigorous mask recommendations in school buildings, according to newly-obtained emails by watchdog group Americans for Public Trust.

The emails, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by the watchdog and published by Fox News, show a string of communications between the National Education Association (NEA) and White House staffers.

The NEA is the largest teachers union in the United States and advocates for education professionals including public school teachers, support personnel, and faculty members at colleges and universities.

Email correspondence includes a draft statement from the NEA to the White House in which the teachers union criticizes the CDC over its masking guidance after it announced on May 13 that vaccinated people could stop wearing masks indoors and outside.

“We appreciate the developing nature of the science and its implications for guidance, but releasing the guidance without accompanying school-related updates creates confusion and fuels the internal politicization of this basic health and safety issue,” the draft statement reads.

“CDC has consistently said, and studies support, that mitigation measures, including to protect the most vulnerable, remain necessary in schools and institutions of higher education—particularly because no elementary or middle school students, and few high school students, have been vaccinated.”

“This will also make it hard for school boards and leaders of institutions of higher education to do the right thing by maintaining mitigation measures,” it continues. “We need CDC clarification right away.”

The union said it was prepared to issue the critical statement and called for the CDC to issue new guidance providing greater clarity over masks in schools and release more rigorous mask recommendations.

One day after the CDC’s guidance went live, Erika Dinkel-Smith, the White House director of labor engagement, said she stopped the NEA from releasing its critical statement.

Following discussion and coordination with the White House, the NEA eventually released a much more relaxed statement, which reads, “CDC’s current recommendation that schools continue to implement existing school-related guidance, including the mandatory and correct use of wearing masks and continuing of social distancing, is an important and welcome clarification about the protections that need to be in place in our schools.”

On May 15, the CDC also released updated masking guidelines noting that schools should maintain both masking and physical distancing, as well as other mitigation measures, through the end of this school year, regardless of vaccination status.

The latest string of emails comes just months after the New York Post alleged that the CDC altered its guidance on when and how schools should reopen after being influenced by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the nation’s second largest teachers union and one of the top donors to the Democratic Party.

AFT President Randi Weingarten later said the CDC had asked her organization to recommend “language” to be used in school opening guidelines.

“The CDC in February and March basically asked all sorts of different organizations to sit down with them and give them comments about what they thought was important,” Weingarten said in an interview with C-SPAN’s Washington Journal. “They talked to parent organizations, they talked to the two [teachers] unions.

“This is normal rule-making,” Weingarten added. “Frankly, this is the way every administration used to do, the problem with the last administration is that they didn’t do it.”

The Epoch Times has contacted The White House and the National Education Association for comment.

CDC Tightened School Mask Guidance After Pressure From Teachers Union, Newly-Obtained Emails Show (theepochtimes.com)

Progressivism makes inroads into public health’s lingua franca

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a set of “guiding principles for inclusive communication” on Aug. 24. The word salad included statements like “health equity is intersectional” and described “diabetics” and “the homeless” as “dehumanizing language.” Public health communications, the guide said, “should reflect and speak to the needs of” a wide range of identities.

To that end, the guide compiles a list of “preferred terms for select population groups,” as well as a list of proscribed terms deemed insufficiently inclusive. “Assigned male/female at birth” is preferable to “biologically male/female,” “people with undocumented status” is preferable to “illegal immigrants,” and “people who are incarcerated” is preferable to “inmates,” according to the guide—which also stresses that public health officials should “avoid jargon and use straightforward, easy to understand language.”

It might seem odd for the CDC to be ironing out the finer points of woke vernacular while COVID-19 is killing over a thousand Americans each day. But the agency wasn’t starting from scratch. Rather, its guidance drew on a network of nonprofits that are institutionalizing progressivism as public health’s lingua franca.

The guide’s preferred terms for gender, for example, come straight from the LGBT activist group GLAAD, whose “Media Reference Guide” says phrases like “biologically male” are “problematic” and “reductive.” And the CDC’s “health equity lens” takes inspiration from a report by the Racial Equity Institute, which is listed at the end of the guide as an “explanation about the root causes of racism and racial inequity.” The report urges policymakers to “confront the reality that all our systems, institutions, and outcomes emanate from the racial hierarchy, on which the United States was built,” and denies that any inequalities are caused by “people’s culture or behavior.”

Reached for comment, the CDC said that its link to the report did not “constitute an endorsement.”

The guide is the latest illustration of how progressive nonprofits capture public health agencies through a kind of technocratic activism, burrowing their ideology into medical language by framing social controversies as settled scientific fact. Government officials, like those at the CDC, then cite those activists alongside professional health associations, many of which have gone woke themselves. That boosts the activists’ credibility while undermining the government’s own: The CDC may be insulated from certain kinds of political pressure, but it is hardly immune to the ideological contagion of medical nonprofits.

Further eroding that immunity is the revolving door between those nonprofits and the CDC. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, for example, appears three times in the guide’s list of “resources and references.” Its CEO, Richard Besser, was the acting CDC director at the start of Barack Obama’s first term. When Americans are told to “follow the science,” they aren’t just being told to socially distance; they’re being told to adopt the values of an activist class and the Democratic donors who power it.

The GLAAD guide offers a case study in this sleight of hand. Since terms like biologically male and female “overly-simplify a very complex subject,” the guide suggests, retiring them will help readers “form their own conclusions based on factual information”—the implication being that talk of scientific realities is itself anti-science.

Professional medical associations have largely blessed this marriage of evangelism and expertise. The CDC’s list of links includes the American Heart Association’s “Racial Equity in Public Policy Message Guide,” which offers “research-based messages” to “dismantle structural racism,” and the American Public Health Association’s “health equity fact sheets,” which cover “environmental justice” and “COVID-19’s impact on housing instability.” The housing sheet calls on federal authorities to “expand, extend, and enforce eviction and rent moratoriums”—exactly what the CDC was doing until the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in August.

“Nothing in the guiding principles is prescriptive,” the CDC told the Washington Free Beacon. That might come as news to whoever wrote the first sentence of the guide: “To build a healthier America for all, we must confront the systems and policies that have resulted in the generational injustice that has given rise to health inequities.”

These sorts of buzzwords permeate the guide’s listed resources. The idea that “racism exists only in individuals crowds out any consideration of systemic solutions,” according to the FrameWorks Institute. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation warns that health equity is imperiled by “institutional discrimination,” which is “not necessarily conscious, intentional or personal.” Several resources also make reference to the “social determinants of health,” a concept to which the CDC devotes an entire section of its website.

This focus on so-called systemic forces explains the guide’s preference for terms that avoid attributions of personal responsibility. “People who refuse vaccination” become “people who have yet to receive [the vaccine],” while “the obese” become “people with obesity,” a term favored by the Obesity Action Coalition. That coalition, which aims “to eliminate the negative stigma associated with obesity,” is the guide’s only recommended resource on issues of “weight bias.”

The CDC’s use of such euphemisms is likely good news for the nonprofits that peddle them. It is likely bad news for public health.

That’s because many medical conditions are in fact under the control of individuals. The risk of severe COVID-19, for instance, drops dramatically with vaccination, a free, two-minute procedure that is now available at almost every pharmacy in the country. And while obesity is sometimes due to thyroid problems or genetic predispositions, it is “generally caused by eating too much and moving too little,” according to the British National Health Service—meaning the best treatments for obesity are “a healthy, balanced diet and regular physical activity.”

The obesity rate for adults in Britain is 28 percent. In the United States, it’s 42 percent—the highest in the developed world. With woke nonprofits at the helm of America’s public health bureaucracy, it is likely to stay that way.

Dr. Ian Lipkin – an American virologist who once claimed there was “no evidence” COVID-19 could have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology – appeared to reverse his premature stance on the origins of COVID-19 in a new interview. 

“If they’ve got hundreds of bat samples that are coming in, and some of them aren’t characterized, how would they know whether this virus was or wasn’t in this lab?” Lipkin asked in reference to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in June before answering, “they wouldn’t.”

The unearthed comments come amidst Lipkin revealing he was informed of a “new outbreak” in Wuhan on December 15th, 2019 in Spike Lee’s documentary miniseries “NYC Epicenters.” The mid-December date, which Lipkin defends when pressed by the interviewer, is at odds with the Chinese Communist Party’s public COVID-19 timeline, first informing the World Health Organization of an outbreak on December 31st, 2019.

The National Pulse has previously exposed Lipkin’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party, including the Columbia Professor receiving awards and consultancy positions from the regime.

Lipkin was heavily quoted by mainstream media outlets including CBS and USA Today in an effort to “debunk” former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Chief Dr. Robert Redfield’s explosive claim linking the virus to a Chinese lab.

“We should be moving away from finger-pointing,” Lipkin told CBS after adding there is “no evidence to suggest that it was created in a lab.”

Top Wuhan Lab Theory Denier Reverses Stance, Reveals He Knew Of Virus Weeks In Advance. – The National Pulse

T

he Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a guide last week for “Inclusive Communication,” cautioning against using words like prisoner, smoker, illegal immigrant, disabled or homeless, which the agency says could imply blame or stigma.

The guide’s opening line says, “We must confront the systems and policies that have resulted in the generational injustice that has given rise to health inequities.” The CDC is now about fighting injustice, not disease.

The agency says instead of gender-specific pronouns like him or her, use “they,” even when referring to one person. And talk about “parents” or “expectant parents” instead of mothers or fathers.

After making the hundreds of language changes the CDC recommends, who has time to defeat COVID-19?

The CDC’s got mission confusion. With parts of the U.S. considering more COVID lockdowns, Americans don’t need language lessons on political correctness. They need scientific information on how to reduce the risk of being infected by this virus indoors. That’s key to reopening workplaces and returning to normal.

Numerous new technologies are said to destroy airborne viruses, including ionization, dry hydrogen peroxide, far UV light and others. But school administrators and office building managers don’t have a clue which ones actually work. They’re flying blind.

The CDC’s thousands of scientists could provide guidance. Not that they should endorse specific brands, but they can assess competing technologies. The CDC flatly refuses. Instead, it cautions against using them because they lack “an established body of peer-reviewed evidence.”

What planet is the CDC on? Peer-reviewed evidence can take years. Here’s the process: An academic journal sends a submitted article to scientists around the world for review and suggested changes. Once that input is received and the article is approved, the wait goes on because many of these journals only publish four times a year.

Glacial slowness doesn’t work in a pandemic. That’s why former President Donald Trump designed Operation Warp Speed for vaccines. The CDC’s timetable isn’t warp speed. It’s warped. The CDC’s tacit premise that yesterday’s technology is good enough will doom us to failure.

Former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb told the Washington Post last week that the CDC has the wrong mentality to respond to a crisis. “Their mind set is we should polish it, vet it, peer-review it.”

The result is the CDC offering 50-year-old information: Open windows, space desks apart and use HEPA filters where possible. HEPA filters were devised for gas masks during World War II, and commercialized for buildings in the 1950s.

Tried and true methods are not necessarily wrong. But the public deserves the latest science, too.

Eighteen months into the pandemic, giant employers like Apple and Amazon again are delaying reopening workplaces. They need help. Only 33% of U.S. office workers are back, according to Kastle Systems. New York City is far worse off, with only 22% back. That kills retail stores, coffee shops and restaurants that serve workers.

If it were possible to get back to normal without technological breakthroughs, it would have happened already. Eric Adams, the city’s likely next mayor, needs scientific information on how to reduce aerosolized COVID-19 virus in transportation hubs, public buildings, offices and schools.

Citing the importance of speed in a pandemic, Gottlieb has been urging the FDA to establish a fast-track way of determining what works and what doesn’t. The CDC should be doing the same using its own scientists.

As for schools, the medical journal Lancet’s COVID task force has chastised the CDC for focusing on masking and social distancing instead of air quality.

A CDC study of 169 Georgia K-5 schools found COVID cases were reduced more by improving air quality than any other intervention. Mandating masks for students produced no statistically significant improvement.

A Kaiser Health News headline in June read: “More than 100 Missouri Schools Have Bought ‘Often Unproven’ Air Cleaning Technology.” The words “often unproven” come from CDC guidance. If school districts are rushing in desperation to buy equipment without enough information, blame the CDC, not the school administrators.

A spokesperson for the company that sold ionization equipment to Missouri schools explained that peer-reviewed research on its equipment doesn’t exist yet. That is why CDC scientists should get to work assessing new technologies themselves instead of writing speech manuals.

If the CDC wants to be politically correct, it can call its new air quality guidance “Indoor Environmentalism.” That almost sounds green.

CDC’s Mission Confusion :: Right & Free (rightandfree.com)