Retracted COVID-19 Papers Cited an Average of 53 Times per Paper

An investigation into COVID-19 research found that among the more than 270,000 papers that have been published since the start of the pandemic, 212 retracted papers were cited 2,697 times, with a median of seven times and an average of 53 times per paper.

A retracted study linking the antimalarial drug Hydroxychloroquine to an increased risk of mortality and heart arrhythmia was the most cited paper with 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction.

Publishing processes were often compromised with COVID-19, according to the co-author of the investigation and director of Cochrane Australia Steve McDonald.

“We saw this push to get information out quickly, and with many more people doing and rapidly publishing COVID research, there’s been a spike in retractions,” senior research fellow McDonald said.

Eighteen percent of citations from retracted papers were critical and “may have directly impacted patient care,” the authors wrote in their paper (pdf).

Despite the retractions, the damage has been done as the research has already been cited by other researchers in the field, spawning more citations.

It had also been reported on in the media, changing the direction of policymaking, including social distancing measures, travel restrictions, and infection control measures which introduced a myriad of disruptions.

Retractions safeguard against error and misconduct, stopping research from impacting scientific ideas and clinical practice, and are crucial to preserving scientific integrity.

However, even high-profile medical journals became vulnerable to haste during the COVID-19 pandemic, the report found.

This comes after hundreds of COVID-19 papers have been removed due to compromising ethical standards, such as using fake or suspect patient data, and were either withdrawn by the prominent medical journals that published them or removed altogether.

Evidence of research papers changing the trajectory of governmental decision-making can be found in the case of monoclonal antibodies, which triggered controversy after several scientists said certain brands of the key COVID-19 treatment would not work for the Omicron variant.

A few months after preprints written by those scientists were published, the monoclonal antibody “sotrovimab” lost Emergency Use Authorisation, causing policymakers to move on to COVID-19 drugs like remdesivir.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) later expanded remdesivir’s authorisation to outpatient treatment and pediatric patients.

Eventually, pandemic response critics put monoclonal antibodies into the alternative treatment group, a place where critics say is automatically stifled or publicly scrutinised as unsafe or ineffective.

Another significant example of governments and the World Health Organisation acting on suspected fraudulent and unverifiable data is the hydroxychloroquine study.

Published in the Lancet on May 2020, the study concluded that the drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine increased the chances of death from COVID-19 at a time when the drug was largely untested.

The authors of the study claimed to obtain medical records of nearly 100,000 patients from hundreds of hospitals on six continents, but more than 100 scientists analysed the findings and found major issues, including inadequate adjustment for variables, a lack of ethics review, and numbers that don’t appear to add up regarding patients in Australia and Africa.

The paper was retracted after two weeks, but it had already shaken the scientific world, prompting the World Health Organization and French authorities to suspend clinical trials testing hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19.

While some studies have shown patients experiencing heart problems when taking hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, the drugs were approved decades ago and have been used historically by people against malaria and other ailments with little concern.

Why Did This Happen?

McDonald said that preprints—which allow authors to publish early versions of research papers before peer review or journal publications—resulted in dubious COVID-19 science, for academics were able to exploit loopholes in the process.

Further, retracted studies weren’t treated with due severity, McDonald said.

“In theory, when people cite retracted studies, they should be citing them in a critical way, alluding to the fact that these papers have been retracted because the research is unreliable,” he said.

“But what we found was that actually in a lot of these cases, even if the author team who cites the retracted paper were doing so long after the paper had been retracted, they weren’t citing it as a retraction.

“They were using it as evidence that ‘this particular intervention is effective’, or ‘there’s nothing wrong with that research’. So they were uncritically citing retracted papers.”

COVID-19 Research Volume Dwarf Other Pandemics

Different sources have stated that some 90,000 to 450,000 COVID-19 papers have been lodged online since the start of the pandemic, outstripping that of other pandemics “by orders of magnitude.”

One source said nearly 28,000 COVID-19 research papers were published in 2020, rising to nearly 68,000 in both 2021 and 2022, whereas another study quotes 404,541 papers from 2020 to 2022.

The Institute for Scientific Information examined the evolution of research across five pandemics—SARS, MERS, H1N1, Zika virus, and COVID-19.

They found that only H1N1 came close to COVID-19 in numbers, peaking at about 1,300 papers in 2011.

McDonald said the pandemic has exposed frailties in scientific publishing that should serve as a warning to the medical science community.

“Blindly citing papers—irrespective of where they’re published—without first assessing their reliability or retraction status can falsely elevate poor and possibly fraudulent research, potentially harming the very people the research should be helping,” he said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/retracted-covid-19-papers-cited-7-times-per-paper_5296963.html

*************************************************

The German-based Investigational Heart Drug That Just Might Effectively Treat Long COVID

In July 2021, the University Hospital Erlangen, situated just north of Nuremberg, Germany came through with a significant discovery involving an investigational heart drug called BC007. The intellectual property went to an academic medical center spin-off called Berlin Cures. The hospital-based team of clinicians-scientists found that BC007 helped a long COVID patient to become symptom free. What’s the status of this drug? Why have so few in North America heard of the drug?

Recently, a TrialSite community member requested a review of BC007, an asset in the Berlin Cures’ pipeline. The biotech declares via its website that it was the first to pursue scientific findings involving a number of diseases associated with pathological functional autoantibodies targeting G protein-couple’s receptors. The company reports that both heart failure and long COVID fall into this category of disease. According to the company, BC007 “can neutralize these autoantibodies, and this is why Berlin Cures has developed a product based on scientific knowledge that may help many suffering patients.”

What follows is a TrialSite breakdown and update on the product’s clinical development.

What is BC007?

BC007 is a DNA aptamer-based compound bound to and eliminated pathogenic autoantibodies directed against the beta-1 adrenoceptor, a receptor that regulates the heart’s rate and contraction strength. Heart cells are harmed by autoantibodies that chronically bind to this receptor in a process that has been found to lead to heart cell death and organ failure in 80 percent of dilated cardiomyopathy patients.

Berlin Cures' flagship product platform, BC007—a novel drug which the company claims shows “potential to revolutionize the treatment of a number of incurable diseases” associated with pathogenic functional autoantibodies (fAABs).

What’s the company’s operating vision?

The company declares that they seek to lead the market for the neutralization of pathogenic functional autoantibodies—their research to date points to the ability of BC007 to “significantly mitigate or even cure a set of diseases associated with autoantibodies, ranging from Long Covid Syndrome (LCS), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), heart failure, and several more.”

What’s the pressing need?

Long COVID may afflict up to 20% of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2—meaning potentially, hundreds of millions worldwide at one point or another during the pandemic may have experienced this condition.

Berlin Cures articulates that BC007 may be “the only drug worldwide that may cure long COVID Syndrome (LCS) at the moment.”

Did BC007 start out as an investigational therapy targeting heart disease?

Yes. The company gave a report via an oral presentation at the March 11 American College of Cardiology’s 2018 annual scientific session in Orlando, Florida. Representatives from the company stated that BC007 was the first drug designed to eliminate autoantibodies that are a major cause of heart failure and to treat heart failure symptoms was effective and well tolerated in a Phase 1 clinical study.

What were the study details?

In the Phase 1 study reported in 2018, the sponsor enrolled 68 subjects and determined that a single dose of intravenous infusion of BC007 was able to eliminate autoantibodies targeting the beta-1 adrenoceptor completely and sustainably. They further reported the investigational product was well tolerated, not provoking any clinically relevant side effects. See the company’s press release.

What about any long COVID evidence?

In July 2021, the period of when Delta was in circulation, media source Archyde, as well as Berlin Cures reported on use of the experimental drug with long COVID.

A group of doctors at the Eye Clinic at the Erlangen University Hospital succeeded for the first time as part of an individual healing attempt involving a 59-year-old man with long COVID Syndrome (long COVID)—he became symptom free thanks to the off label treatment with the experimental drug.

Dr. Christian Mardin, the senior physician running the eye clinic reported, “At the moment, unfortunately, we can no longer treat people with the drug because it has not yet passed all approval studies.”

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/bc007-the-german-based-investigational-heart-drug-that-just-might-effectively-treat-long-covid-6c0bfd0b

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

How the COVID-19 Pandemic Caused Massive Mental Illness on the Left

We’ve all noticed it; there has been a distinct rise in online vitriol and mental illness from the left over the last few years, not just online but also making headlines for outrageous behavior in public and in their daily lives. Studies have shown that the COVID-19 lockdowns caused a sharp increase in mental health problems, and since the left locked down the hardest, it makes sense it affected them the worst.

Even for those on the left who didn’t live in heavily locked down areas, their paranoia made them take their own steps to isolate themselves from society. We all know the families who disappeared; they stopped going to church, the gym, and other social activities, refused to let their children participate in sports or hang out with other children due to the brainwashing, which caused a disturbingly sad increase in mental illness among children.

A 2022 study from the National Institutes for Health (NIH) examined the partisan difference in mental health problems caused by the pandemic, and found “a clear partisan distress gap, with Democrats consistently reporting worse mental health than Republicans.” The study observed “Democrats experiencing more disruption of routine and social isolation to reduce the risk of physical illness and Republicans risking physical health to maintain normalcy and sustain social connections.”

The World Health Organization reported that the pandemic triggered a 25% increase in depression and anxiety worldwide. The NIH published a study which found that suicide rates increased by as much as 145%.

Due to excessive paranoia about COVID-19, the left was more likely to find ways to work in social isolation — if they worked at all; many took advantage of the left’s generous expansion of unemployment benefits during the pandemic. A significant negative about working from home is higher stress, since “being ‘always on’ and accessible by technology while working remotely leads to the blurring of work and non-work boundaries,” the World Economic Forum (WEF) reported. The WEF cited a study from the United Nations which found that 41% of remote workers reported high stress levels, compared to just 25% of office workers.

No doubt some of those on the left who have been the hardest hit are paid trolls working from home, who encounter little real social interaction, so most of their days consist of posting vile things on social media towards the right. This is horrible for their mental health, since an NIH study found that “workplace incivility” is correlated “with a host of negative outcomes, including increased burnout, turnover intentions, and physical symptoms.”

Ever since Elon Musk bought Twitter last year, halting the banning of conservatives merely for engaging in healthy debate, the left has gone all out against them with hate. Instead of following through and leaving the platform as the left initially threatened, the paid left-wing trolls have stuck around and multiplied, spewing out hate at an alarming level.

An NIH study of mask wearing among older people found that 25% of them “experienced depressive symptoms.” A study in Hong Kong from Frontiers of Psychiatry which found that psychiatric morbidities including depression increased due to the pandemic, revealed that those who were more educated about COVID-19 were less likely to suffer depression due to masks.

The study said, “[P]articipants who had better knowledge of the disease pandemic and higher perceived self-efficacy to wear masks properly were less likely to report depressive symptoms.”

It found that those who “perceived high severity of the disease outbreak were most likely to report probable depression.” In other words, the fear that leftist government officials and their comrades in the mainstream media put into people about COVID-19, instead of educating them, contributed to mental illness.

Hostility on social media continues to increase, with Pew finding that about 40% of Americans have experienced online harassment, and half of those state it was over politics. Democrats are more likely to get stressed out over talking politics with those on the other side than Republicans. A study in 2021 found that Democrats are now twice as likely as Republicans to end a friendship over politics.

Violent threats from the left regarding politics are becoming more commonplace. This month, after receiving a backlash for putting on a prominent display of radical LGBTQ and Satanist merchandise, Target minimized the display. In response, an LGBTQ supporter sent the corporation an email stating that bombs had been placed in five Target stores.

Unfortunately, it’s difficult to track this rise in hate on the left because most of the research out there is from the left and focuses on making the left victims instead of accurately reporting the data. There are myriads of victim groups on the left like the Anti-Defamation League and Human Rights Watch which appear to exist solely to create the illusion that the right is responsible for all the threats and violence.

We know the hate isn’t increasing on the right, for the simple fact that because other than on Twitter, the right is massively censored by big tech. Those engaging in hate on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Google, etc. have either been banned, suspended or threatened with bans so much they no longer post as much offensive content. In contrast, the left has free reign on those platforms to bash the right.

The mainstream media won’t cover the increase in hate coming from the left. They publish long, sympathetic articles about left-leaning political figures who have been harassed by the right — some which aren’t even true — while ignoring those of us on the right who are seeing a steady increase in the most vile attacks including death threats.

And perhaps even more alarming, the left already had worse levels of mental illness than the right. The NIH study which found more mental illness among Democrats than Republicans also stated, “This gap did not simply emerge as a result of the pandemic, but rather reflects a pre-existing partisan distress gap.”

https://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2023/05/29/how-the-covid-19-pandemic-caused-massive-mental-illness-on-the-left-n2623807

*****************************************************

Early Use of Molnupiravir antiviral Associated with Reduced Hospitalization and Death Among US Veterans

When both Paxlovid and Molnupiravir were rolled out as EUA oral drugs to treat COVID-19, I accepted them clinically and placed them as antiviral options in the McCullough Protocol.

One of the reasons for my early adoption was that I knew any novel drug advanced by Operation Warp Speed and endorsed by the CDC, FDA and NIH would engage doctors who wanted to treat patients but were fearful of prescribing hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin outside of a clinical trial.

In the McCullough Protocol, no drug is necessary or sufficient, thus any oral antiviral in combination with other medications would comprise a lifesaving “early treatment regimen” as compared to patients who received no medications at all.

Xie et al. reported from the Veterans Administration automated database and found that among US veterans of whom were 92% men aged 70 years, 46% former smokers, 63% vaxxed and boosted, that early use of the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase inhibitor, molnupiravir, especially if started on Day 1, was associated with reduced risk of post-acute sequalae, hospitalization and death after acute COVID-19.

Of note, slightly more patients who received molnupiravir had natural immunity (18%) and more received concurrent corticosteroids (14%). The authors did not account for other ambulatory drugs in the McCullough Protocol, but I anticipate that molnupiravir was associated with more extensive use of multidrug therapy shown to reduce hospitalization and death.

In summary, we use non-randomized analyses such as this not to make therapeutic claims on a specific drug, but to analyze overall patterns of care and in this case, be reassured that early molnupiravir as part of a multidrug regimen was associated with achieving the over-arching goal of reducing hospitalization and death. The only shortcoming is that not all high-risk patients were given a chance with home therapy to survive free of these two outcomes.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/early-use-of-molnupiravir-associated-with-reduced-hospitalization-and-death-among-us-veterans-46830212

***********************************************

Ron DeSantis Running for President on his Covid Record

Given the current political climate and the fact the Covid pandemic has turned into a dividing line between Republicans and Democrats, DeSantis seems to be seeking a way to bolster his conservative credentials, with an anti-vaxx slant. The Florida governor is also looking for a way to distinguish himself from both Donald Trump and Joe Biden. DeSantis’ Covid policies appear to be the way for him to separate from the pack. Afterall his state was the state of freedom during the pandemic, right?

DeSantis critical of both Trump and Biden

This past weekend DeSantis criticized Donald Trump for his Operation Warp Speed imperative during the onset of the Covid pandemic, also going after Joe Biden for his support of vaccine mandates. The Florida Governor declared “The way they weaponized these Covid vaxes was a massive incursion into our freedoms,” the governor said. “They wanted to deny people the right to put food on their table if they didn’t bend the knee and get a Covid shot that they may not have wanted and that many of them did not need.” In reference to Trump, DeSantis added, “We can never allow ‘Warp Speed’ to trump informed consent in this country ever again.” This was regarding Trump’s push to develop the Covid vaccine in conjunction with Big Pharma.

DeSantis: anti-mask, anti-vax, anti-lockdown

DeSantis is “escalating” his campaign, in conjunction with his presidential bid, to discredit the Covid-19 vaccines and the companies that produced them. Indirectly this means he must attack Trump, given the vaccines were his program.

This will draw a sharp distinction between the governor and Biden who worked hand in hand with Big Pharma on pushing the Covid vaccines. Under the DeSantis administration Florida came out against mandatory vaccination, mask wearing and lockdowns. And his surgeon general also came out against vaccination. DeSantis touted Florida as an “oasis of freedom.” He even hosted a 90-minute discussion on the safety and efficacy of the Covid vaccines.

Covid policies could be centerpiece of campaign
DeSantis could make his Covid policies the immediate focus of his campaign as a way of distancing himself from Donald Trump. Even though, reportedly, the governor did receive a Johnson and Johnson jab.

This was at the beginning of the pandemic but DeSantis has evaded questions as to whether or not he received a booster. He has a point: it’s his own personal business.

Even though DeSantis wanted Trump’s approval in the past and the governor likely can’t win the White House without Trump’s base, DeSantis may use his Covid policies to bolster his conservative, differentiating views. “They didn’t want to have any criticism of their lockdown policies,” DeSantis said. “If you can’t defend the policy, then maybe you should be looking in the mirror. But that’s not what these elites wanted to do.”

DeSantis distrust of the vaccines spread in Florida and only 11.8% of Florida children five and older are fully vaccinated and boosted with the Covid-19 jab. The nationwide average is 17.4% according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). And Publix, the Florida drug store chain, decided not to offer the Covid shot to children under five years old. Even though Covid may be fading as a health issue, Ron DeSantis appears to be using it as a political issue.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/ron-desantis-running-for-president-on-his-covid-record-ec9928b2

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

Long Covid causes erectile dysfunction and hair loss

Hair loss and erectile dysfunction have joined the list of long Covid symptoms, according to new research.

The study found that while the most common symptoms include loss of smell, shortness of breath and chest pain, others include amnesia, erectile dysfunction, hallucinations, an inability to perform familiar movements or commands, bowel incontinence and limb swelling.

Patterns of symptoms tended to be grouped into respiratory symptoms, mental health and cognitive problems, and then a broader range of symptoms.

As well as spotting a wider set of symptoms, researchers also identified key groups and behaviour that put people at increased risk of developing long Covid.

As reported last month, a record 2 million people in the UK are estimated to be suffering from long Covid, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Around 3.1 per cent of the British population are suffering symptoms that persist for more than four weeks after catching Covid. Some 376,000 people who first caught Covid around the start of the pandemic have reported symptoms lasting at least two years.

The study suggests that females, younger people, and those belonging to a Black, mixed-race or other ethnic group are at greater risk of developing long Covid.

Additionally, those from a poorer background, smokers, and people who are overweight or obese, as well as those with any of a wide range of health conditions, were more likely to report persistent symptoms.

Senior author Dr Shamil Haroon is an associate clinical professor in public health at the University of Birmingham.

He said: “This research validates what patients have been telling clinicians and policymakers throughout the pandemic – that the symptoms of long Covid are extremely broad and cannot be fully accounted for by other factors, such as lifestyle risk factors or chronic health conditions.

“The symptoms we identified should help clinicians and clinical guideline developers to improve the assessment of patients with long-term effects from Covid-19, and to subsequently consider how this symptom burden can be best managed.”

People who tested positive for the virus reported 62 symptoms much more frequently 12 weeks after initial infection than those who had not contracted the virus, the study found.

The NHS list of common Covid symptoms includes fatigue, shortness of breath, chest pain or tightness, and “brain fog”.

Researchers from the University of Birmingham analysed the anonymised electronic health records of 2.4 million people in the UK alongside a team of clinicians and researchers across England.

The data obtained between January 2020 and April 2021 comprised the records of 486,149 people with prior infection, and 1.9 million people with no indication of coronavirus infection after matching for other clinical diagnoses.

Using data from patients who had not been admitted to hospital, the team of researchers was able to identify the three distinct categories of symptoms.

Anuradhaa Subramanian, research fellow at the Institute of Applied Health Research at the University of Birmingham and lead author on the paper, said: “Our data analyses of risk factors are of particular interest because it helps us to consider what could potentially be causing or contributing to long Covid.”

She added: “Women are, for example, more likely to experience autoimmune diseases. Seeing the increased likelihood of women having long Covid in our study increases our interest in investigating whether autoimmunity or other causes may explain the increased risk in women.

“These observations will help to further narrow the focus on factors to investigate what may be causing these persistent symptoms after an infection, and how we can help patients who are experiencing them.”

The findings are published in Nature Medicine.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/long-covid-symptoms-treatment-hair-b2160752.html

***************************************************

New York, in Sudden Reversal, to Drop COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Health Care Workers

New York officials are rescinding a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers that led to thousands being fired.

Lawyers for the state announced the sudden move during a hearing on May 24 in a case brought by doctors who faced termination for not getting vaccinated.

“Due to the changing landscape of the COVID-19 pandemic and evolving vaccine recommendations, the New York State Department of Health has begun the process of repealing the COVID-19 vaccine requirement for workers at regulated health care facilities,” the state health department stated.

“This is a big win,” Sujata Gibson, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the case, told The Epoch Times in an email. “I cannot underscore enough how significant this is, not only for the 34,000 doctors, nurses, and other health care workers who have been unable to work in this state since 2021, but also for the millions of New Yorkers who have been impacted by the dangerous and crippling staffing crisis that resulted from their forced exodus from the field.”

Some 34,000 workers lost or left their jobs over the mandate, which was imposed in 2021. That reduced the health care workforce in the state by 3.5 percent.

Nurses and others had warned that the mandate would contribute to staffing shortages that were already plaguing some facilities.

No new punitive actions will be undertaken as the mandate’s repeal is being considered by the Public Health and Health Planning Council, the department stated in a letter to providers. But sanctions over previously cited violations may still be sought.

Plaintiffs in the state case said officials violated the New York Constitution when they made the mandate permanent in 2022, bypassing the Legislature. Mary Bassett, the health commissioner at the time, also ignored data that showed that vaccinated people could be infected with and transmit COVID-19, the petition stated.

State officials during the pandemic claimed that the mandate would help to fight the spread of COVID-19 and protect staff members and patients. They also said they followed the law in promulgating the mandate.

New York Supreme Court Judge Gerard Neri sided with the plaintiffs in January, ruling that the government was “clearly prohibited from mandating any vaccination outside of those specifically authorized by the legislature” and that the Department of Health “blatantly violated the boundaries of its authority” in issuing the mandate despite the fact that the vaccines do not prevent transmission.

The ruling barred enforcement of the mandate but was stayed after New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s administration filed an appeal.

Hearing

Plaintiffs had expected state lawyers to argue in court for the January ruling to be overturned. They were surprised when lawyers first announced that the mandate would be dropped.

“The State Health Department has just informed me that they intend to repeal the regulation that is being challenged here,” Jonathan Hitsous, one of the lawyers, told the court.

“Because there’s no longer a regulation to enforce, we argue that this case has now gone moot,” he added.

Hitsous then urged the court to still overturn Neri’s ruling, claiming that if left in place, it would cast doubt on the regulation and other immunization requirements.

Gibson objected.

“It’s taken years of litigation to get here, and if they can keep doing this every time there’s a new flu vaccine mandate they want to pass or if they want to put in another COVID vaccine mandate, or if they want to do the next pandemic, the next vaccine, this will happen again, and these people … their lives have been ruined,” she said. “They have lost everything, and we just want to prevent that from happening again.”

The court adjourned without issuing a ruling.

“Our fight is not over. In a blatant show of gamesmanship, the state had the gall to ask the Court not only to drop the appeal, but to also vacate … the decision below, without reviewing it on the merits,” Gibson told The Epoch Times.

“Courts cannot allow defendants to get out of legal consequences of a final ruling by simply stopping the unlawful conduct mid-appeal. New Yorkers must be able to use the lower court’s ruling as precedent so that this never happens again.”

The New York State Department of Health and Hochul’s office didn’t respond by press time to requests by The Epoch Times for comment.

Under state rules, the Public Health and Health Planning Council must vote to repeal certain regulations. The body is composed of Dr. James McDonald, the acting commissioner of health, and a number of other doctors and health officials. It isn’t clear yet when the council will take up the matter.

Individual providers, meanwhile, should “individually consider how to implement their own internal policies regarding COVID-19 vaccination while remaining in compliance with applicable state and federal laws,” Dr. Eugene Heslin, a state health official, said in the letter to providers.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-york-in-sudden-reversal-to-drop-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-for-health-care-workers_5290919.html

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

Over 300 COVID-19 Papers Withdrawn for Not Meeting Standards of Scientific Soundness

Including the "Lancet" study that condemned hydroxychloroquine

Research journals have withdrawn well over 300 articles on COVID-19 due to compromised ethical standards and concerns about the publications’ scientific validity.

Retraction Watch has provided a running list of withdrawn papers on COVID-19 ranging from “Acute kidney injury associated with COVID-19” to “Can Your AI Differentiate Cats from COVID-19?”

A total of 330 research papers have currently been retracted.

During the pandemic, researchers have compromised on ethical standards and tried to either get more publications approved or to take shortcuts around ethics, senior researcher Gunnveig Grødeland at the Institute of Immunology at the University of Oslo says, after going through the list of articles that have been withdrawn, and the reasons for some of them.

While it is quite natural for some articles to be updated or changed to be published in a different form, some have been retracted because the researchers did not obtain informed consent during the research.

“It will, of course, be withdrawn when it is found that ethical guidelines have been breached,” Grødeland told Khrono, a Norwegian higher education and research newspaper.

She pointed out that other articles have been withdrawn after the editors noticed that the strategies the papers mentioned were giving the wrong impression in the media of being recommended as actual treatment or prevention of COVID-19.

She said these sorts of articles had to be withdrawn as they claimed things that neither the authors of the articles nor their institutions could vouch for.

In addition, some studies did not include a large enough sample size. When more subjects were included, the researchers could no longer maintain the same conclusions they made earlier about the effect of the drugs.

Grødeland said that part of the reason this happened during the pandemic was that relatively more people suddenly started conducting research on a topic they really knew relatively little about.

Even prestigious journals such as the Lancet were publishing those articles. One of Lancet’s studies even caused both the World Health Organization (WHO) and the national government to stop the comprehensive testing of hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness against COVID-19.

The extensive Lancet study, allegedly based on research fraud, said that the drug increased the risk of heart arrhythmia and mortality for COVID-19 patients.

However, most of the retracted papers were published in smaller journals, the vaccine researcher points out.

“When you look at the articles that have been retracted, the vast majority were published in the less interesting journals. It is they who are mainly affected by withdrawals,” Grødeland said.

But there were a number of environments that do not normally carry out research, which suddenly started producing research after receiving funding from local hospitals. “It may have caused things to get a little out of hand in some places,” she said.

Hearing Loss?

A recent case from the University of Manchester backtracked on an earlier study that said that COVID-19 was associated with hearing loss, tinnitus (ringing in the ears), and vertigo.

Published in 2021, the researchers said they had identified about 60 studies that report audio-vestibular problems in people with confirmed COVID-19.

“Our analysis of the pooled data, published in the International Journal of Audiology, reveals that seven to 15 percent of adults diagnosed with COVID-19 report audio-vestibular symptoms,” audiology professor at the University of Manchester Kevin Munro said.

“The most common symptom is tinnitus followed by hearing difficulties and vertigo.”

Two years later, after the virus has been blamed for a range of health problems, including auditory disorders, the same university published a new study concluding that hearing loss is unlikely to be caused by COVID-19.

Lead author and audiologist Anisa Visram explained their reasoning. “We know that viruses such as measles, mumps, and meningitis can damage the auditory system,” Visram said in a release.

“It is also well known that COVID-19 can affect our sense of smell and taste, so it was reasonable to assume it might also affect our sense of hearing.”

Visram assured that their current study is well designed and executed and is the most thorough assessment of hearing conducted in people with COVID-19.

Munro also acknowledged that their earlier work may have been rushed. “There was an urgent need for this carefully conducted clinical and diagnostic study to investigate the long-term effects of COVID-19 on the auditory system,” he said.

“Many previous studies were published rapidly during the pandemic but lacked good scientific rigour.”

“It hasn’t been clear if these are incidental findings or if COVID-19 is damaging the hearing system,” Professor Richard Ramsden, Trustee at the Dowager Countess Eleanor Peel Trust, added.

“While the study cannot rule out infrequent hearing loss as a result of COVID-19, we now know that for most people, there is nothing to be concerned about.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/over-300-covid-19-papers-withdrawn-for-not-meeting-standards-of-scientific-soundness_5293140.html

*********************************************

FDA Detects Serious Safety Signal for COVID-19 Vaccination Among Children

Children of certain ages who received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine face an elevated risk of heart inflammation, according to a new federally funded study.

Vaccinated children aged 12 to 17 face a heightened risk of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, and a related condition called pericarditis, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) researchers found.

The number of myocarditis and pericarditis events in that age group met the threshold for a safety signal, the researchers reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association on May 22.

The elevated risk was present within seven days of vaccination, according to the data.

Researchers identified 89 cases among 12- to 15-year-olds and 64 cases among 16- and 17-year-olds after reviewing records from commercial databases run by CVS Health, HealthCore, and Optum.

The claims were made between Dec. 11, 2020, when Pfizer’s vaccine was cleared by the FDA, and mid-2022.

Researchers looked at data to determine whether any of the 20 health problems were experienced at higher rates by the vaccinated. The problems included myocarditis or pericarditis, Bell’s palsy, appendicitis, and stroke.

Only myocarditis or pericarditis met the criteria for a safety signal, which may be related to vaccination.

U.S. officials have already concluded that the conditions are caused by the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, although the vaccines didn’t carry a warning for months after authorization. One possible mechanism is excessive immune responses triggered by lipid nanoparticles. Novavax’s vaccine, authorized in 2022, can also cause the heart conditions, authorities say.

More on Study

Researchers looked at health plan members who received a Pfizer vaccination, excluding those who lost their insurance during a certain window of time, which was 365 days for most outcomes.

Researchers then examined the number of each outcome in a different window of time, referred to as a risk window, which varied from a single day to as long as 42 days after vaccination.

The study then took the rates of problems from each database and compared them with expected rates, which are based on pre-pandemic numbers.

Out of 3 million children who received at least one vaccine dose, 153 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis were identified in the 12- to 17-year-old age group. More cases were identified among children aged 5 to 11, but not enough to trigger a signal.

A medical record review of the 37 cases for which records were obtainable confirmed 27 cases as true myocarditis or pericarditis.

None of the other 19 outcomes examined met the signal criteria, according to researchers.

“These results provide additional evidence for the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines in the pediatric population,” the researchers said.

Dr. Peter McCullough, a cardiologist, disagreed.

“My concern is that these data represent a gross under-reporting of the frequency and severity of COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis,” McCullough, who has called for the withdrawal of the Pfizer vaccine, told The Epoch Times via email.

Since the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention acknowledged in mid-2021 concerns that the vaccines might cause heart inflammation, “there have been [more than] 200 papers in the peer-reviewed literature and over 100 fatal documented cases largely among young men, peak ages 18–24 years, some with autopsy proven COVID-19 vaccine heart inflammation resulting in death,” according to McCullough.

That includes five people who suddenly died in Germany and six people who perished in the Nordic countries.

A request for comment sent to Steven Anderson, the FDA official listed as the study’s corresponding author, sparked a response by an FDA spokesperson, who declined to provide additional citations for the safety claim.

Anderson’s co-authors included researchers with Acumen, Optum, HealthCore, CVS, and IQVIA, with multiple members reporting connections with Pfizer. The time period included when the old Pfizer vaccine, which is no longer available in the United States, was used.

‘Pretty Ludicrous’

Norman Fenton, emeritus professor of risk at the Queen Mary University of London, said the researchers’ safety claim doesn’t hold up in light of the facts that the study shows a signal for myocarditis and pericarditis and that children are unlikely to benefit from the COVID-19 vaccines.

“The conclusion that ‘these results provide additional evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are safe in children’ is pretty ludicrous,” Fenton told The Epoch Times in an email.

The researchers also failed to take into account what’s known as the healthy vaccine bias; previous research has found that people who decide to get vaccinated tend to be healthier than those who don’t.

“They are comparing a highly select group of child and adolescent insured vaccine recipients to a historical baseline population consisting of everyone in the relevant age group who were insured,” Hebrew University lecturer Josh Guetzkow said.

Experts also said the risk windows appeared short, as post-vaccination conditions can sometimes crop up months afterward, and noted that the signal criteria were structured so that some outcomes would need to happen at more than double the rate among the vaccinated to meet them.

The shortest risk window was just one day, for anaphylaxis, or severe allergic shock. Some others were just one week. The rest were 28 days or 42 days.

In their protocol (pdf) for conducting the research, FDA officials said they chose risk windows based on pre-pandemic studies, including one from 2007.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/fda-detects-serious-safety-signal-for-covid-19-vaccination-among-kids_5288229.html

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

Brief Hiatus

I am again taking Friday off blogging. There is too much going on in my personal life today -- involving female persons -- for me to have the time and energy to blog today. I am rather pleased to be having a lot to do with female persons in my 80th year

Breakthrough: Hong Kong Study Demonstrates SIM01 Treats Long COVID Symptoms

The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) reports that 70% of patients in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China who have recovered from COVID-19 continue to suffer from at least one long COVID symptom by month six after onset of SARS-CoV-2 infection. With no proven therapeutic regimen to address long COVID, CUHK is quickly becoming a microbiome (gut health) research hub. They conducted a triple-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial revealing that modulation of the gut microbiome using oral microencapsulated live bacteria (SIM01) developed at CUHK led to marked improvement in long COVID symptoms.

Notable news, this was not broadcast widely in the West. The findings were presented recently at the late breaking abstract plenary session at Digestive Disease Week 2023 in Chicago. Once these results are scrutinized by the broader scientific community along with advancement of human research could lead to a compelling therapeutic answer to long COVID.

Gut microbiome research watchers: CUHK increasingly becomes a leading hub for this pioneering research, discovering an intricate, intertwined connection between internal bacteria and the condition afflicting possibly hundreds of millions of people worldwide. With an urgent need to identify effective therapeutic interventions for long COVID symptoms, particularly when debilitating, breakthroughs in Hong Kong may point to therapeutic pathways. Biotech’s in the USA, Europe and elsewhere should look into SIM01.

Who is behind this latest CUHK research?

Professor Martin Wong, Professor from the Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care as well as Francis KL Chan, Dean and Director of the Centre for Gut Microbiota Research, CU Medicine and Professor Siew Ng, CU Medicine’s Croucher Professor in Medical Sciences and Director of Microbiota I-Center (MagIC).

What does the research show so far?

In the CUHK announcement, the Hong Kong-based academic research center’s Professor Martin Wong Chi-sang first defined long COVID and explained that the contagion affects various organs in the body, with potentially debilitating impacts.

Previous studies by CU Medicine, again, arguably the leading academic research center in the world when it comes to the intersection of the gut microbiome and long COVID, demonstrate that patients with long COVID symptoms were linked to altered gut microbial signatures.

Last year, the Hong Kong team reported results from an open?label, proof?of?concept study published in the Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology showing that the use of SIM01 hastened antibody formation against SARS?CoV?2, reduced nasopharyngeal viral load, reduced pro?inflammatory immune markers and restored gut dysbiosis in hospitalized COVID?19 patients. TrialSite has actively chronicled the CHUK team. This finding suggests that modulation of the gut microbiota represents a potentially useful intervention.

Now, with a bigger triple-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (the RECOVERY study) points to the efficacy of SIM01--improving long COVID symptoms across multiple systems and organs.

What is SIM01?

CU Medicine researchers invented SIM01using big data and machine-learning technologies as part of the discovery process. Developed based on a microbiome formula, the team developed the experimental regimen containing Bifidobacteria strains, galactooligosaccharides, xylooligosaccharide and resistant dextrin into an oral formula using microencapsulation, an advanced food processing technology using which any compound can be encapsulated into a specified material, making a tiny sphere of diameter ranging from 1 μm to several μm.

The study results

From 2021 to 2022, a total of 463 recovered patients with at least one long COVID symptom joined the RECOVERY study. Their mean age was 49 years old, and 65.4% were female. Nearly 70% of participants were suspected to have been infected with the Omicron variant. All subjects were randomly assigned to receive SIM01 or a placebo containing low dose Vitamin C for six months.

CUHK investigators report on compelling results, finding that significantly more patients who received SIM01 than those who had placebo evidenced improvement in digestive problems, fatigue, difficulty in concentrating, memory loss and general unwellness at six months follow-up.

Additional metagenomic analysis of study participant stool samples revealed that SIM01 resulted in increased bacteria diversity, increased abundance of “favorable” bacteria and reduced abundance of “unfavorable” bacteria in the gut, highlighting the effectiveness of SIM01 in restoring gut dysbiosis.

Professor Siew Ng, CU Medicine’s Croucher Professor of Medical Sciences and Director of Microbiota I-Center (MagIC), commented, “To our knowledge, this is the first clinical trial to show that modulation of the gut microbiome can improve long COVID symptoms including memory and concentration problems. These data support the importance of the gut-brain axis. Restoring a healthy gut microbiota is a novel approach to improve neurological symptoms via the production of beneficial metabolites from gut bacteria that circulate to the brain to improve brain function.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/breakthrough-cuhk-study-demonstrates-sim01-treats-long-covid-symptoms-2d5fbd33

**********************************************

Cardiovascular Disease Death Soars Worldwide-- particularly in poor countries

A new study released by the World Heart Federation reveals a truly global cardiovascular disease crisis unfolding over the last few decades, particularly intensifying in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). The World Heart Report launched at the 2023 World Heart Summit, offers a detailed breakdown of cardiovascular disease risk and mortality data across the globe, combined with the group’s reviews of country-to-country health policy initiatives to mitigate this scourge. Deaths linked to cardiovascular disease increased from 12.1 million in 1990, to 20.5 million in 2021, making this therapeutic contagion the biggest killer worldwide. While it’s assumed by many that the rich, developed world represents the highest burden of cardiovascular deaths, the opposite is true: four in five cardiovascular disease death occur in LMICs.

The report was made possible by the Novartis Foundation, the philanthropic arm of the multinational Switzerland-based pharmaceutical company Novartis.

A non-governmental organization (NGO), the World Heart Federation sponsored the report. The World Heart Federation was formed in 1978 by the coming together of the International Society of Cardiology and the International Cardiology Federation first under the name “the International Society and Federation of Cardiology.” By 1998, they changed their name to the current one. Representing over 200 organizations across 100 countries, the World Heart Federation champions global cardiovascular health pursuing the organization's mission to provide information about heart-related research, care and treatments. The organization declares on its website that it’s the only cardiovascular-focused organization “in official relations with the World Health Organization.”

The study authors report the highest concentration of cardiovascular disease deaths occurred in the Central Europe, Eastern Europe and Central Asia region. Importantly, over the past three decades, total cardiovascular disease deaths increased mostly due to ageing and a growing population. But actual cardiovascular disease death rates declined from 345.5 deaths per 100,000 people in 1990 to 239.9 deaths per 100,000 people in 2019. The declining rates are enjoyed more by rich developed countries than LMICs.

The study’s authors are listed below. One co-author, Professor Fausto Pinto, a former World Heart Federation President went on the record:

“The data doesn’t lie. This report confirms the serious threat that cardiovascular disease poses all over the world, particularly in low-and middle-income countries. Up to 80 percent of premature heart attacks and strokes can be prevented. It’s vital that countries prioritize rolling out tools and policies to protect people from CVD.”

A confluence of factors contributes to the growing deaths including high blood pressure, air pollution, tobacco use and elevated LDL cholesterol. Overall, a key finding is that risk factors vary across regions, making it vital that countries be aware of their risk profile. It also found that countries that invest more in healthcare as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) have lower CVD death rates, while CVD death rates are higher in countries where people pay more out-of-pocket for healthcare.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/cardiovascular-disease-death-soars-worldwide-4-out-of-5-in-lmic-developed-world-mortality-rates-improve-95a6fe1f

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

Myocarditis with Ventricular Tachycardia Following Bivalent COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination

In the elderly with baseline heart disease, any degree of cardiovascular injury could be disastrous as published by Yamamoto et al., a case report involving the death of an 81-year-old man after his fifth mRNA shot.

The authors report this man decompensated within a day of his fifth shot and required defibrillation, mechanical ventilation and full life support measures for myocarditis which precipitated the cardiac arrest, conduction defects and heart failure. He stayed in the hospital for over a month.

Yamamoto et al., Myocarditis with ventricular tachycardia following bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccination, 2023.

The authors summarize the recent growing literature on COVID-19 vaccine induced myocarditis: “This report indicates the need to suspect myocarditis based on clinical presentation and the importance of multimodality diagnosis using electrocardiography, echocardiography, laboratory testing, myocardial scintigraphy, and CMR. In our case, CMR showed LGE in the inferolateral segments of the epicardial to mid layers, which has been reported to be a characteristic finding in patient with mRNA vaccine-associated myocarditis. Endocardial biopsy is the gold standard for detecting myocarditis but is invasive and thought to have less sensitivity in disorders resulting from epicardial and patchy diseases such as myocarditis.

On the other hand, CMR is considered to be the cornerstone for diagnosis of vaccine-associated myocarditis due to its high diagnostic performance, with a reported sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 96% in community-acquired myocarditis. The COVID-19 vaccine is thought to cause myocarditis via direct damage by free spike protein and induction of inflammatory cytokines (e.g., IL-1β and IL-6) by the lipid nanoparticles covering the mRNA. Expression of free spike protein may increase after the initial bivalent vaccination because antibodies against the spike protein of the BA.4-5 variant are yet to be generated.

In autopsy cases, histology has shown patchy interstitial myocardial T-lymphocytic infiltration (T-cell dominant; CD4>>CD8) associated with damage to myocytes.6 Molecular mimicry between myocyte tissue and the SARS-COV2 spike protein may also produce an anti-myocytic immune response.6 Therefore, T lymphocyte-mediated cell injury and heart-specific autoimmunity have been suggested as mechanisms of post-vaccine myocarditis.”6

I wonder how many elderly patients have died within a few days of the COVID-19 vaccine, unrecognized and not reported by families, doctors or others. Only all-cause mortality data published in the coming months to years will give us a clue. In the meantime, all seniors should understand that even if prior shots were tolerated, the next one could be fatal.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/myocarditis-with-ventricular-tachycardia-following-bivalent-covid-19-mrna-vaccination-9b38c106

*******************************************

Conspiracy-Driven Osteopath Dies at 57--Didn’t Believe in COVID-19 Narrative but Lacked Proof for His Claims

What happened to Dr. Rashid Buttar? Known for outlandish claims about the COVID-19 pandemic, at least, according to the mainstream media—he was even part of a group tagged the “Disinformation dozen”—he died suddenly May 18, at the age of 57. He was able to get on CNN where he was alleged to have made exaggerated claims and later told people he had been poisoned. Was there a connection?

British-born but raised in the U.S. Midwest, Buttar was a licensed osteopath doctor based in Charlotte, North Carolina. He had a long history of run-ins with the medical establishment and was labeled a quack and an “anti-vaxxer” by the mainstream media and medical establishment. See evidence of a 2008 encounter via Quack Watch.

Buttar, undoubtedly troubled by growing confluence of industry and medicine, increasingly embraced alternative medicines and approaches, contrary to mainstream acceptance. For example his views, deemed controversial, for the use of chelation therapy for a number of conditions, this type of claim is frowned upon as there is no Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized procedure associated with such claims. The FDA issued a warning on chelation claims back in 2016.

He was reprimanded on two occasions by the North Carolina Board of Medical Examiners for unprofessional conduct plus once cited by the FDA for illegal marketing of unapproved and adulterated drugs.

His videos were available via the Next News Network.

Buttar was branded a conspiracy theory for making claims that among other things, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), was at least, partially behind the creation of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen.

Yet TrialSite has chronicled how the mainstream media and medical establishment ridiculed discussion of a lab leak theory after Dr. Anthony Fauci seemingly suppressed any critical vetting of the lab leak hypothesis early on in the pandemic. Such government-related suppression will make folks paranoid, as they will wonder “What is he trying to cover up?” Transparency and accessibility to data and government activity is important for a free and open democratic market economy and society.

And to this day the origins of SARS-CoV-2 hasn’t been proven yet, but a growing momentum suspects a lab leak origin, including contingents in the U.S. government and in intelligence agencies.

There is considerable evidence that Fauci’s NIAID had outsourced coronavirus research to Wuhan Institute of Virology via the EcoHealth Alliance nonprofit group.

While there could be something to the claim that NIAID and EcoHealth were outsourcing coronavirus research to Wuhan (maybe even gain-of-function activity) Buttar pushed the envelope with ever more outlandish declarations such as that “everyone who has had the vaccine would be dead by 2025.”

While there is a cult-like group continuously declaring that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are bioweapons meant to kill people, TrialSite has extensively reviewed contracts involved with the federal government’s procurement (including Department of Defense-related entities) and all of them point to contractual call for a safe and effective vaccine.

Most likely coronavirus research, including some joint NIAID and DoD dual use R&D activity goes back at least a few decades. It’s how a post-World War II American system gained geopolitical and socio-economic superiority. But contradictory forces now threaten the unraveling of that post World War II order.

Think about the internet—it wasn’t Al Gore that invented the amazing network making the world a much smaller place. It actually started in the 1960s as a way for government researchers to share information and collaborate. Back then computers were not only huge, but also immobile, and to share data in one computer meant traveling to the site of that computer, or alternatively go through the process of having magnetic computer tapes sent via snail mail. But this network of computers, first funded by government and defense interests, further developed in universities and companies in the private sector, leading to a revolution in how we live and work---and of course paving the way for fortunes to be made—the ultimate point.

Ditto for life sciences which undergoes a trajectory that includes lots of private sector but also public and government and defense R&D. Myriad aims involved, ultimately in America profit seeking motives transcend the social, political and cultural milieu.

So just because the DoD is involved with the triggering of a national emergency due to the deadliest pandemic since the Spanish American flu doesn’t mean that the resulting countermeasures are meant for warfare, even if at some point along the historical R&D trajectory defense research was a factor.

TrialSite has received significant hate mail when using logical, reasoning and contractual evidence to critically question the sensationalistic claims from individuals claiming to know definitively that the vaccines are designed with nefarious intent.

During his CNN interview, Buttar made a few claims all of which we believe are sensationalized, including 1) more people are dying from the COVID-19 vaccines than from COVID-19 itself 2) the Red Cross won’t accept blood from COVID-19 vaccinated people 3) most people who took COVID-19 vaccines will be dead by 2025 and 4) definitely declare COVID-19 a staged, planned operation politically motivated as part of a secret global plot to depopulate the earth.

In the interview with Drew Griffin, Buttar backs off a claim comparing Fauci directly to Hitler, which is often the case with COVID-19 criticism making exaggeration declarations online, often for clicks, dollars and recognition. TrialSite has observed a whole COVID-19 counter industry form often driven ultimately by monetization via various channels.

What’s the reference to poisoning?

Recently Buttar was interviewed by CNN and claimed that he had been given poison “200 times of what was in the vaccine” reports.

Now deceased with no cause of death disclosed, it’s not known what happened and why he was recently in intensive care. In an interview with Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson earlier in the month, the skinny Buttar told her, “I went through a very difficult personal health challenge a few months ago.”

Full court press

Mainstream media has been tough on Buttar, referring him to an “Antivax crank” and touting that if he would have received the mRNA vax, they would have cited that as the cause of his demise. Some activists actually blame “vaccine shedding” or alleging poisoning for his death. Vaccine proponents have pointed the finger that Buttar’s anti-Covid vaccine conspiracy rhetoric broadcast to millions via social media caused the loss of life during the pandemic.

Confirmed death?

A friend of Buttar, Sayer Ji founder of GreenMedInfo.com and co-founder of Stand for Health Freedom confirmed the doctor’s death via a tweet declaring “In loving memory of Dr. Rashid Buttar, 1966-2023 It is with sadness, yet great appreciation, that we pay tribute to my friend and colleague Dr. Rashid Buttar, who passed away on May 18th.”

The GreenMedInfo blog owner Sayer Ji confirmed that just weeks earlier he was in the ICU for 6 days purportedly with both a stroke and diagnosis. Ji shared that the doctor allegedly told him he had biomarkers consistent with adverse events from mRNA vaccination, which of course never happened with him. Ji notes, “As you will see in the video, he believed that he was experiencing the result of shedding…from the transgenic mRNA jabs.”

Some in the medical freedom movement believe that the COVID-19 response is a part of a broader initiative to usher in totalitarian controls over Western society.

Yet this media suspects SARS-CoV-2, if made in a lab, was more than likely an accidental event and that government responses were defensive but coordinated to some extent with World Health Organization involvement. Although it could be the case that if the pandemic did start with a leak there has been a considerable cover up. But this doesn’t mean an all-encompassing plot by say, the Word Economic Forum, to impose global domination. Life’s far more complex than that, or at least that is the general consensus of ours.

While conspiracy theorists rage, often important unfolding events and manifestations represent the evolving, often historically rooted, dynamic results of interest seeking behavior involving conflicting spheres of influential, social, economic and political life. In a hybrid capitalist market and administrative State-entangled system such as ours the march to continuously capture ever more value, often through disruptive, or destructive, leads to an observation that nearly everything could be deemed an orchestrated series of actions—a possible foundation for a conspiracy. While simultaneously, one could come to the complete opposite conclusion, that human systems such as ours face the ongoing menace of completely unraveling, into a far darker, more perilous abyss.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/conspiracy-driven-osteopath-dies-at-57-didnt-believe-in-covid-19-narrative-but-lacked-proof-for-his-claims-5b02e34c

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

Lax Indian sterility precautions for eye drops cause 4 Deaths + 4 Lose Eyeballs: Drugs Linked to Rare Bacteria

After previous episodes of laxity, I have personally long maintained a blanket policy of never using pharmaceuticals from India

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now collaborate with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as state and local health department investigating 81 people who have succumbed to a rare bacterial strain linked to recalled eye drop products produced by Global Pharma Chennai, India ( EzriCare Artificial Tears, Delsam Pharma Artificial Tears and Delsam Pharma Artificial Ointment) which were recalled a few months ago in February of this year.

Fourteen people have suffered vision loss, and four people have had to have their eyeballs removed, and another four people have died. This outbreak is concerning as the bacteria behind the infections and deaths, known as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, is resistant to standard antibiotics. Based on US health agency’s flagging, Indian inspectors visited a plant near Chennai, India, that produced the eyedrops which led to the identification of how the products were produced, exposing inadequate sterility controls and measures.

Now cases have spread across 18 states, including California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin.

In a case that generated little U.S. media notice acting on a U.S. concern, Tamil Nadu’s Drug Controller and members of the Indian Central Drug Control Authority paid a surprise visit to inspect Global Pharma facility at 2 AM in early February, as reported by Indian press.

TrialSite breaks down this crisis.

How many people have the CDC identified so far in the U.S. affected? 81, 4 deaths, 4 people have lost their eyeballs, 14 people have lost their eyesight.

What’s causing the outbreak?

A drug-resistant strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The outbreak strain, carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa with Verona integron-mediated metallo-β-lactamase and Guiana extended-spectrum-β-lactamase (VIM-GES-CRPA), had never been reported in the United States prior to this outbreak.

What types of infections is the outbreak associated with?

The outbreak is associated with multiple types of infections, including eye infections.

What are the culpable products?

The investigation has identified EzriCare artificial tears as a common exposure for many patients. CDC and FDA recommend clinicians and patients stop using and discard EzriCare Artificial Tears and two additional products made by the same manufacturer, Delsam Pharma’s Artificial Tears, and Delsam Pharma’s Artificial Ointment.

What’s the CDC’s current update?

As of May 15, 2023, CDC, in partnership with state and local health departments, identified 81 patients in 18 states (CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, IL, NC, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, PA, SD, TX, UT, WA, WI) with VIM-GES-CRPA, a rare strain of extensively drug-resistant P. aeruginosa. This represents an increase of 13 patients since the last update. Among these 13 patients, 6 (46%) had specimens collected prior to the February 2, 2023, manufacturer recall of products associated with this outbreak. These cases were confirmed after the recall date due to the time it takes for testing to confirm the outbreak strain and because of retrospective reporting of infections. Of the 7 patients who had specimens collected after the recall, most either resided in long-term care facilities with other known cases or reported use of a recalled brand of artificial tears.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/india-quality-tragedy-for-u.s.4-deaths-4-lose-eyeballs-drugs-linked-to-rare-bacteria-34011e72

***************************************************

Net Zero politicians: liars, scoundrels, and morons

The lies told by politicians usually have no consequences. Their intellectual dishonesty, as a species, is such that citizens go to the polls assuming election promises have an expiry date similar to nine-day-old milk.

If the lie is a promise to ‘lower taxes’, the inevitable raising of taxes several months later is met with a groan in the same way that the purchaser of a used car sees an oil stain develop on the garage floor. There’s a sense of resignation rather than rage. After all, you’re the one that shook hands with a shonky dealer.

Fast-forward three years, and that same politician is likely to be re-elected on a follow-up promise to subsidise mechanics working on repairs for all leaking and broken used cars – provided they become members of a union.

Do you see how this works?

Even though people were ripped off by failed election promises the first time, they are motivated to vote for the same bunch of scoundrels in the hope they’ll fix the problem their policies caused. Then we have a whole new group of mechanics tempted by government-contracted work which they can only secure if they make a permanent commitment to an institution aligned with that political party.

Is this kind of governance good for society? No. It encourages the sale of crap cars and a generation of mechanics who earn their living from failed government policy. The only clever thing it does is create a cycle of dependence where each broken election promise serves as a platform for the next campaign. Solving problems is a thankless task, but creating them … well, that’s genius.

Remember the Covid era? Governments in every state employed hundreds of thousands of ‘health’ workers to man vaccine booths, check vaccine certificates, work in quarantine centres, clean public spaces, and police the behaviour of citizens. It was a Goliath, publicly-funded industry that encouraged all of those people to vote for politicians who promised to protect Covid jobs. Is it good for society to remain in a permanent pandemic state? No. But it’s good for those workers, operating at the expense of an ever-diminishing pool of genuine private wealth creators. Eventually people turn around and wonder where this economic disaster came from. Never mind, surely the government will fix it…

The are no consequences for political parties that operate in this fashion. They remain in power, gaining bewildering majorities, until society falls to bits and the ruling party has no choice but to donate the mess to the opposition with little more than a box of band-aids in the Treasury.

This is the standard Labor model for government. Barter. Break. Bleed. Bail.

Unfortunately, the other half of this equation is an opposition that is prepared to forgo political glory and instead clean up the mess created by its rivals. For the first time in Australian history, the Liberal Party has decided to dismiss its historical duty and ‘get in on the game’, leaving the country with no one to stop the economy from crossing the red line.

If this nauseous feeling seems familiar, it’s because this is the cycle adopted by major parties across the world for Net Zero. We have to give them credit for a Bond-level deceit after bureaucracies, such as the United Nations, got bored with ‘world peace’ and decided to invent an existential problem which they used to con nations into spending trillions every year to ‘fix’ – even though you cannot fix something that isn’t real. It’s the same scam run by tribal wizards extorting favours in exchange for ‘weather dances’. While they might not be saving the planet, the United Nations did give themselves a new purpose. Maybe it’s for the best, given how terrible the whole ‘world peace’ initiative is looking.

In summary, the global leadership line goes: ‘There’s an apocalypse coming, but vote for us and we can save you!’

This comes with a range of feel-good slogans like, ‘clean, cheap, reliable energy’ and, ‘be a good global citizen’, but the underlying policy is the same: ‘your taxes can change the weather’. It’s the fashionably acceptable version of the white saviour syndrome where the same people that used to take gap years in Africa now stick a banner on their social media profile, shrug off rising prices, and delude themselves into thinking that makes them a good person.

Humans have been paying for their sins and silencing their existential fears this way for a long time. Politicians prey on this kind of thinking. What’s not to love about Net Zero? You get to be a good citizen, businesses compete on slogans instead of product quality, and the government ends up rich. Everybody wins! Well, not exactly. There are plenty of problems with Net Zero – power bills for one, and the blackouts for another. Pretty soon we’re going to hear from disgruntled landowners as the government reclaims their properties to build transmissions lines, and if Chris Bowen gets his way regarding offshore wind farms – the entire East Coast of Australia is going to march on Canberra. That’s before we get to the mounting pile of renewables corpses to contend with and society’s blind eye to real pollution which sits unattended in our waterways.

‘But don’t worry! Vote for us again and this time we’ll give you a discount on your power bills!’ Woe be to the idiots that fall for that one.

There’s now an entire class of workers with no ideological investment in the spiritual cause of Net Zero. Their lack of faith is irrelevant, because Net Zero policies mean they’re struggling to keep their businesses going. Instead of punishing politicians for endangering their livelihoods, humans do a very strange thing: they vote for the same guys on the promise of it being ‘fixed’.

This is how Net Zero manages to wreck the economy and increase its popularity. It’ll happen again and again and again until those businesses shut down and the population ends up on welfare. Then they want more welfare. Then taxes are raised to pay for it. Then they want more… Those voters have to vote for the government, or their welfare cycle vanishes.

Australia will die long before the lights go out. These are not the politicians of Australia’s infancy. They are not going to have a common sense epiphany and do the right thing for the survival of the nation. Hard choices and self sacrifice are not phrases found in the language of career politicians and factional seat warmers. The rats that scurry around in Canberra have their eye on lucrative international positions and corporate jobs. They’ll move on to bigger salaries. No consequences, remember?

The next slogan is already being promoted: ‘Vote for us and we’ll give some of you a government handout for your power bills! (And raise taxes on the rest of you suckers.)’

What was that last bit?

Maybe we’ll get lucky next time if we vote for them again. That’s what people think as they are reminded by wall-to-wall state-funded media that the apocalypse is on its way.

I’m not sure how to make this any clearer: stop voting for liars, scoundrels, and morons.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/05/net-zero-politicians-liars-scoundrels-and-morons

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************

Justice Gorsuch Slams COVID Emergency Powers: ‘Greatest Intrusions on Civil Liberties’ in ‘Peacetime History’

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch on Thursday lamented what he calls an intrusion into civil liberties by pandemic emergency decrees since the start of COVID-19 as the high court dismissed a suit on Title 42 as moot.

“Since March 2020, we may have experienced the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country,” Gorsuch, one of six conservative-leaning Supreme Court justices, said in an opinion accompanying the court’s decision (pdf) published on Thursday.

Gorsuch wrote that emergency decrees ordering vaccine mandates and lockdowns issued by federal and state executive agencies resulted in an accumulation of power in those agencies and accompanied this loss of liberties during the pandemic.

“The concentration of power in the hands of so few may be efficient and sometimes popular. But it does not tend toward sound government,” the justice wrote. “However wise one person or his advisors may be, that is no substitute for the wisdom of the whole of the American people that can be tapped in the legislative process.”

This view, some experts say, shines a light on the high court’s vision of restoring a balance of power in the federal government to that more aligned with America’s founders.

“My first reaction to reading Justice Gorsuch’s comments was that the Constitution is waking up,” attorney Jeff Childers told The Epoch Times in an interview on Friday. Childers fought—and won—against local governments in a mask mandate and another vaccine mandate case in Florida.

Gorsuch’s warning came as the Supreme Court dismissed a case brought by Republican attorney generals to keep in place Title 42, the emergency measure that the Trump administration implemented in March 2020 as a reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic. Both Trump and Biden administrations used Title 42 to expel illegal immigrants.

While the state’s case hinges on the more technical question of whether they can intervene in a case in another state to keep Title 42 in place, Gorsuch’s opinion indicated that the high court believed this question is no longer relevant as the public health emergency—to which Title 42 was designed as a reaction—ended in April.

Technicalities aside, Gorsuch took the opportunity to reflect on the bigger picture: namely, what he sees as a threat to civil liberties during the COVID pandemic when “executive officials across the country issued emergency decrees on a breathtaking scale.”

Loss of Civil Liberties

The Title 42 case brought by the states illustrates this threat to civil liberties, Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, wrote in his Thursday opinion.

He acknowledged that the surging illegal immigration across the border is a “crisis,” and so was COVID. But he warned that “the current border crisis is not a COVID crisis,” and the fact that the executive branch used the pandemic as the pretext to deal with another crisis at the border is emblematic of the broader, fear-driven response from U.S. institutions that may have led to “the loss of many cherished civil liberties” during COVID.

“Executive officials across the country issued emergency decrees on a breathtaking scale. Governors and local leaders imposed lockdown orders forcing people to remain in their homes. They shuttered businesses and schools, public and private. They closed churches even as they allowed casinos and other favored businesses to carry on,” the justice said, adding that violators were threatened with criminal sanctions and federal officials pressured social media companies into suppressing views they disagree with.

“They used a workplace-safety agency to issue a vaccination mandate for most working Americans. They threatened to fire noncompliant employees and warned that service members who refused to vaccinate might face dishonorable discharge and confinement,” he wrote.

Gorsuch also noted the apparent inaction of the legislative branch—state legislatures and Congress—in response to these executive decrees and how the judicial branch, which was “bound to protect our liberties addressed a few—but hardly all—of the intrusions upon them.”

“In some cases, like this one, courts even allowed themselves to be used to perpetuate emergency public-health decrees for collateral purposes, itself a form of emergency-lawmaking-by-litigation,” Gorsuch added, referring to the effort by Republican states to keep Title 42. Collateral purposes refer to purposes other than those originally intended by the decree or law.

The conservative justice warned that an important lesson from the pandemic is that “fear and the desire for safety are powerful forces,” and, citing Aristotle, noted that “even the ancients warned that democracies can degenerate toward autocracy in the face of fear.”

“Make no mistake—decisive executive action is sometimes necessary and appropriate,” he added. “But if emergency decrees promise to solve some problems, they threaten to generate others.

“And rule by indefinite emergency edict risks leaving all of us with a shell of a democracy and civil liberties just as hollow.”

A Need for Reflection

H. Jefferson Powell, a prominent constitutional scholar who teaches law at Duke Law School, echoed Gorsuch’s view that the country should reflect on what the government did in response to Covid via emergency powers.

He quoted an opinion of Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson in the landmark Steel Seizure Case, that the founders “suspected that emergency powers would tend to kindle emergencies.”

“My only disagreement with the assertion is that I see no reason to qualify it with ‘may’ – I do not think there is any question that the intrusions imposed because of the Covid virus on the civil liberties that Americans ordinarily exercise were the greatest in our peacetime history,” Powell, who served as the Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Clinton administration, wrote to The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

“This is, simply put, a historical fact, which Justice Gorsuch chose (understandably) to present in non-dogmatic terms,” Powell wrote.

John Malcolm, vice president of the Institute for Constitutional Government at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said that Gorsuch’s Thursday opinion reflected a “course correction” on the Supreme Court’s view of executive overreach that has been taking place since Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, started her tenure in 2020.

A prime example of that correction, Malcolm said, was when the court ruled (pdf) in a 5-4 vote in favor of a group of religious adherents in New York who sued the state to remove COVID restrictions imposed on worship activities via emergency decrees.

The New York case, with Barrett on the bench, was similar in facts to two earlier cases in Nevada and California, but its ruling ran counter to the two earlier rulings that were made when the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg was part of the Supreme Court.

“The Supreme Court said enough—this goes too far, and [the state executive branch] is impinging on the free exercise rights of these religious adherents,” Malcolm said.

Looking at the more distant past, Malcolm noted that out of about 80 national emergencies declared from the beginning of the 20th century to today, 41 are still in effect—not including the COVID public health emergency, which ended in April.

Each one of these emergency declarations, he said, “gives the president and executive branch agencies extraordinary powers,” or power that goes beyond what the law normally prescribes.

“Now there’s something wrong with that.”

He observed that Gorsuch was making an “incredibly powerful statement” calling Americans to “not to step back and defer, but to step up and debate” during these emergencies: “Is this an emergency? Or are we going to let it curtail our civil liberties? If so, how? And in what ways? And for how long?”

Agreeing with Gorsuch’s view that these extraordinary authorities need to be seriously examined, Malcolm suggested: “What [Congress] probably needs to do is have a sunset provision that says, you can declare an emergency, but unless we reauthorize it, that emergency officially ends after six months, a year, two years, some reasonable time period.”

A Consequential Ruling to Come

According to Zack Smith, Manager of the Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program in Heritage’s Meese Center, a future case in the Supreme Court may curb the power of executive agencies by subjecting their actions to a higher degree of scrutiny from the courts.

That case involves a dispute between fishing companies and the Biden administration, in which attorneys for the fishing companies asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Chevron doctrine, a Supreme Court precedent set in 1984.

The Chevron doctrine has led to the “exponential growth of the Code of Federal Regulations and overregulation by unaccountable agencies,” the attorneys for the fishing companies wrote to the Supreme Court in a filing (pdf).

Under this doctrine, Smith explained, courts must give way to executive agencies (such as the Environmental Protection Agency) in interpreting certain ambiguous laws—provided their interpretation is reasonable.

The consequence, Smith indicated, is that courts are sometimes barred from ruling against these agencies, even when these agencies interpret the law differently than the court would have.

“And that’s not really the way our system of government is supposed to work,” Smith said. “It’s not the duty of the courts to defer generally to executive branch officials. It’s their duty to interpret the law and say what the law is.”

Reflecting on Gorsuch’s comments on Thursday, Smith criticized the current “bureaucratic morass” in the executive branch: “You essentially have an executive branch agency making their own rules, prosecuting violations of those rules, and then adjudicating prosecutions—that’s a concentration of power.”

“So, if Chevron is overturned, that would be a very big decision—and we go a long way, I think, to restoring the proper balance of power between our different branches of government,” Smith said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/justice-gorsuch-slams-covid-emergency-powers-greatest-intrusions-on-civil-liberties-in-peacetime-history_5279480.html

***************************************************

Rebel doctors speak

From the Australian Medical Professionals Society

We have seen censorship unparalleled in the scope of its reach in human history, especially in the treatment of Covid. Doctors who have dissented from official state-sanctioned treatment diktats have been and continue to be sanctioned by the medical regulator, and egregiously unfairly fired from their positions.

The restrictions on prescribing ivermectin have recently been dropped by the TGA. The provisionally approved Covid vaccines have been associated with unprecedented harm and demonstrated negative efficacy; alarmingly, there are still official recommendations for their continued usage.

The unprecedented squashing of scientific debate by the regulatory authorities enabled by MainStream Media and social media censorship, which continues to this day, is a major block to the advancement of healthcare in this country and around the world. This is highly destructive to the foundations of an open and free democracy. If the medical profession is happy to unquestioningly accept the dictates of health bureaucrats instead of scientific debate, this is to the detriment of patients’ health.

The doctors at the Australian Medical Professionals Society have invited the doctors of the Australian Medical Association to a public debate on the government’s response to Covid with a particular focus on the safety and efficacy of the provisionally approved Covid vaccines. Health Professionals must be free to publicly debate public policy using the most up to date scientific evidence and their clinical judgment, unhindered by government regulatory censorship. We would also like to debate the ethical egresses forced on the medical profession and the public by the imposition of mandates.

In modern medicine, our symbol is that of a Physician’s staff with an Asclepiusian snake wrapped around it. Asclepius was the Greek God of healing, and Hippocrates was a student of his. Asclepius made use of a magic potion, which when drawn from the right side of the Gorgon would kill, and from the left side could cure. It speaks to the duality as our role as healers, we seek to heal, but we also have the capacity to harm. The way we minimise harm to our patients is to always allow open discourse, and courteous dialogue amongst health professionals so that the best ideas can prevail.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/05/its-time-for-doctors-to-join-a-public-debate-on-covid-policies-and-treatments/

**************************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***********************************************