Wednesday, November 02, 2022



Anti-vax protesters chant ‘F–k Joe Biden’ at NYC Halloween parade

A group of anti-vax protesters chanted “F–k Joe Biden” as they marched through the streets of Manhattan Monday night in the city’s annual Halloween parade.

The political statement was but a small sideshow to a frightful evening that transformed parts of the city into a scene from “The Walking Dead” — with a wide variety of zombies lumbering up Sixth Avenue.

One other zombie, in full Michael Jackson “Thriller” regalia, danced his way along the parade route.

The brash language aimed at the president was repeated by a reveler dressed as a priest who was holding a sign that read “COVID 19 is a tool of control.”

A man dressed as the “Pfizer CEO” with a zombie mask and “killing you slowly” written on his suit danced to the beat of drums and a crowd of costumed characters followed below with a “RIP COVID-19” banner.

Asked about the mandates, a “Mayuh Eric Adams” impersonator went on a rant pretending to be the real mayor of New York City.

“I am never going to drop the mandates especially for city workers,” the fake Adams said. “I’m dropping it for private workers but not for city workers because they are second-class citizens.”

His response earned boos and a “F–k Eric Adams” chant as well.

“I don’t care about anybody’s rights,” the impersonator said. “I’m the may-uh and I get stuff done.”

Politics aside, both long-time attendees and first-timers said they were glad to partake in the parade’s 49th year.

https://nypost.com/2022/11/01/nyc-halloween-parade-met-with-f-k-joe-biden-chant-by-anti-vaxers/

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

Alarming Excess Death Among Europe’s Youth in 2022 – January-August

We are posting an alarming analysis of European excess death data from our colleague, Hervé Seligmann, an infectious disease expert in Europe from Euromomo.eu. You will note in the chart above that excess death in the age group 0-14 has skyrocketed since the introduction of the COVID injections.

As evidence of harm from the COVID injections mounts, global populations are left wondering why authorities continue the mantra of safe and effective and persist with their policies.

From Hervé Seligmann, 10VIII2022 (edited for clarity):

The two panels above represent the weekly cumulative excess deaths in two age groups for the population of 24 European countries, representing approximately 500 million people. Excess deaths for a given year are calculated as the observed deaths for that year minus the average deaths for previous years. 2019 and 2021 had particularly high cumulative excess deaths for the 0-14 year age group. 2021 had outstanding high cumulative excess deaths for the young adult population, 15-44 years old. Trends for 2022 at this moment in time, early August, exceed all previous years for both age categories. For the youngest, excess death already surpasses numbers at the end of other years.

The COVID-19 injections are plausibly involved in the excess death numbers for the second half of 2021 and 2022 until August. COVID-19 itself cannot be a cause of excess mortality in these age classes as the death rates in these classes are statistically zero. Neither could confinement and other measures be involved in excess mortality in 2022. These numbers in the young are worrisome.

https://healthfreedomdefense.org/alarming-excess-death-among-europes-youth-in-2022-january-august/

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

Unreasonable war on anti-vaxxers in nAustralia

For the past two and a half years, Jack the Insider (Peter Hoysted), through his columns in the Australian, has waged a war on ‘anti-vaxxers’. Of course, he conveniently lumps into that category anyone who dared to point out the fact that the Covid vaccines, far from being the panacea he believes them to be, actually do very little, even when it comes to personal protection.

On October 27, he wrote a piece which so stood out for its lack of rigour that it has to be called out.

He started off with this statement:

When Covid-19 vaccines first became available in the summer of 2021, I argued that this was the end game for anti-vaxxers. The science and the data that followed would be irrefutable. I was right about the data. But I was wrong to think this shameless movement would put its cue in the rack.

Let’s leave aside the emotion about this ‘shameless movement’, who he says ‘are joined by a larger group of disaffected people who don’t read enough and listen too often’. Jack the Insider is the one who is not right about the data because he doesn’t read enough or listen properly.

He cites in his piece a string of US government data that supports the lie that Covid became ‘a pandemic of the unvaccinated’. Jack is a stickler. He even cites a study of prisoners (people who, unlike the vast majority of us, are confined and cannot move out and about in society as they please) to demonstrate ‘what we have now overwhelmingly shows that unvaccinated individuals are more infectious and for longer’.

Unlike Jack, let’s be honest and do the job properly.

If Jack wanted to do his job properly, he could have done far worse than read regular contributor to these pages and The Australian, Ramesh Thakur’s column in the latter on August 20 this year, and he would realise to his argument there is a very strong counter-argument, published by none other than NSW Health:

The Covid report from NSW Health for the week of July 10-16 says: “The minority of the overall population who have not been vaccinated are significantly over-represented among patients in hospitals and ICUs with Covid-19.” Just two pages later the same report gives the number of unvaccinated people admitted to hospital and intensive care units as zero. The sentence is repeated verbatim in the latest weekly report for July 31-August 6, with the number of unvaccinated people admitted to hospital at zero and to ICU just one.

Even by the standards of public health authorities across the world gaslighting the people to nudge them into docile – and often performative – compliance with official edicts, this level of internal contradiction of narrative with data is breathtaking.

Not a single Covid death under 40 was reported in the week to August 6. The total number of boosted people who died with Covid was 71.3 per cent of the 1,281 Covid deaths whose vaccination status was known, slightly above the “more than 68 per cent” of eligible people who have been boosted.

Thus the effectiveness of boosters in preventing death lasts only a short time.

People who have received two to four doses made up over 95 per cent of the over-16s and 98.1, 95.8, and 82.6 per cent of Covid hospital admissions, ICU admissions and deaths, respectively.

In the 11 weeks from May 22 to August 6, the unvaccinated comprised 0.2, 1.8 and 13.1 per cent of all NSW Covid-related hospital admissions, ICU admissions and deaths, respectively.

The double vaccinated and boosted made up 98.1, 95.4 and 85 per cent of the same respective totals. Just the boosted added up to 73.3, 73.4 and 69.9 per cent.

We are no longer in the realm of a pandemic of the unvaccinated.

Despite major protective benefits, Covid vaccines are undeniably leaky. Their real-world effectiveness lasts a disappointingly short time.

Strike one.

Then our Jack goes on a tirade against Rob Roos, whitewashing the anger over Pfizer executive Janine Small’s admission that there was never any testing done to demonstrate that the jab prevented transmission because ‘we had to move at the speed of science’. Jack dismisses the outrage at this as ‘shrieking’, and refers to, among other things, ‘peer-reviewed modelling’ (which he doesn’t reference) that suggested we couldn’t wait the usual five to ten years to produce a safe vaccine because ‘we would have to wear 14 million excess deaths a year if we waited’.

As we knew reasonably early in the piece, the modelling could never be trusted. Here are the undisputed facts about Covid from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare from November 2021, published in these pages. The average lifespan of an Australian is 82.6 years. The average age of Covid fatalities in Australia is 85. Since the pandemic began, the Covid fatality rate for Australians under 50 is four in 12,000. Sixty-six per cent of Covid deaths have been in nursing homes. Seventy-three per cent of Covid deaths involved pre-existing chronic health conditions and a higher number involved non-chronic but somewhat serious health complications. It would be difficult, therefore, to justify discrimination on the basis of vaccine status, especially if one has no pre-existing conditions, or is not in a vulnerable category.

Strike two.

Mr Hoysted, continuing his crusade against the ‘shrieking’ states that we always knew the vaccines would never prevent transmission – noting an FDA study – and that this was taken over by ‘political hyperbole’ about ‘protecting grandma’. He even cites an Israeli peer-reviewed study which showed ‘the ability of the vaccine to prevent transmission waned with time and with the advent of the Delta variant’. Well, I, among many other in this publication and elsewhere, were saying that as far back as April 2021. To then, as our Jack does, gloss over the way politicians and health bureaucrats promised to make lives miserable for people on the basis that they saw no point in getting a jab because not only did it not prevent transmission, but that, based on their own age and health circumstances, they believed it wasn’t necessary, is, in the view of this correspondent, inexcusable.

However, our Jack doesn’t give up. He uses the same study to insist that those who were unvaccinated for Covid would be more infectious and infectious for longer. As we know, that has been shown to be wrong. Remember when two doses were enough, then three, now four? Maybe that is why Denmark halted its Covid vaccine program back in April. Even before then, Lancet published this article noting the futility of vaccine mandates in the face of transmissibility (I’ll refer to it again below).

But our Jack still insists that he is right and has ‘indisputable evidence’ to prove it. He writes:

In the Oxford Academic Open Forum on Infectious Diseases, three infectious diseases doctors, two from the US and one from Scotland, examined three randomised trials and found that “receipt of the vaccine was associated with a 70 per cent reduction in all SARS-CoV-2 infections 21 days after the first dose and 85 per cent reduction seven days after the second dose. A similar cohort study of 3,975 health care workers, first responders, and other frontline workers in the United States who were tested weekly found a 91 per cend reduction in infection risk after full vaccination by an mRNA vaccine and an 81 per cent reduction after partial vaccination.”

Jack goes on:

While vaccine mandates may have been excessively applied across a range of industries (I never quite understood why they were imposed on footballers or construction workers), that analysis provides hard evidence as to why vaccine mandates continue to be necessary for frontline health workers, emergency response workers and even more obviously, for those working in aged care.

Well, that Lancet study I cited above directly contradicts this assertion, when it found that triple vaccinated Israeli doctors and nurses were getting Covid and passing it on to their patients: ‘[T]he demonstration of Covid-19 breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated health-care workers (HCW) in Israel, who in turn may transmit this infection to their patients, requires a reassessment of compulsory vaccination policies leading to the job dismissal of unvaccinated HCW in the USA,’ it argued.

So much for ‘hard evidence’. Strike three.

A suggestion for our Jack. Since he has all the ‘hard evidence’ that the Covid vaccine is safe and effective, he might want to ask his ALP friends in the federal government why it is that the Budget, handed down last week, is warning that Covid vaccine injury payouts could reach $77 million. He might want to investigate why the CDC, which he places so much faith in, fought tooth and nail to prevent this data from being released.

Maybe then our Jack might put his cue in the rack.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/11/jack-the-insider-is-out-of-bounds/

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

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

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

Posted by JR at 4:36 PM 0 comments

Tuesday, November 01, 2022



‘Politically Motivated’ CDC Decisions During COVID

Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) are leading a GOP call for investigations into “politically motivated” decisions made by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In a letter exclusively obtained by The Epoch Times, Roy and Biggs, joined by Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) called on Republican leaders to add the issue to a growing list of potential investigations if Republicans take the House.

The letter is addressed to Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and
Committee on Oversight and Reform Ranking Member James Comer (R-Ky.).

The letter comes in the wake of a unanimous vote by the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to add COVID-19 vaccines to the standard immunization schedule for children.

All members of the ACIP voted to add the Moderna, Pfizer, and Novavax vaccines to the 2023 schedules, asserting that the vaccines, despite waning effectiveness, can still prevent severe disease. While technically the vote was only a recommendation, that recommendation is highly likely to be approved by the CDC.

This vote came after a Pfizer executive admitted that their COVID-19 vaccines were not tested for preventing transmission.

“We view this as COVID is here to stay,” said Dr. Matthew Daley, one of the advisers on the ACIP. “When I think about the routine immunization schedule as a pediatrician, I think of it as an opportunity to prevent serious disease and death. And if something is added to the schedule, it’s because I feel like the benefits continue to strongly outweigh the risks.”

This decision, Biggs and Roy warned, will continue to undermine Americans’ freedom and protect vaccine manufacturers from legal liability.

“This decision is concerning for multiple reasons and will only put the well-being of American families with school-aged children at further risk of their healthcare freedom while protecting pharmaceutical companies from any liability related to vaccine injuries,” the lawmakers wrote.

In response to the decision, Roy and Biggs called for the CDC to be added to a growing list of federal agencies to be investigated for misconduct by Republicans.

“If Republicans are once again entrusted with the majority of the House of Representatives, congressional committees with oversight of the CDC should immediately begin investigations, host hearings, and hold accountable those involved in politically motivated decisions throughout the COVID-19 pandemic,” the duo wrote. “This latest decision is but just one example.”

‘Unwarranted’

Citing several statistics showing that children are at minimal risk from the disease, and in some cases are more at risk from the vaccine, Roy and Biggs called the recommendation by the ACIP “unwarranted.”

“The decision to include such a revision in the childhood immunization schedule is unwarranted,” the lawmakers wrote.

For instance, the lawmakers noted CDC statistics showing that those aged 0–17 years old infected with COVID are at minimal risk for hospitalizations, with rates of hospitalization never exceeding 4.8 percent throughout the pandemic. During several months, hospitalization rates for 0–17-year-olds were as low as 0.3 percent according to the same data.

Further, the lawmakers cited evidence from medical studies showing that children aged 0–19 years had a 0.0003 percent mortality rate from COVID-19, or three deaths per million infections. Other research showed that in 100 percent of cases, children who died from COVID-19 had co-morbidities.

Additionally, the lawmakers warned, “studies show that children have an increased risk to COVID-19 vaccine side effects.”

After a second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, one study found, boys aged 12–17 years were more likely to have an adverse cardiac event than to be hospitalized.

In men under the age of 40, another study showed, incidents of myocarditis—inflammation of the heart muscle—were more likely after a second dose of the vaccine than after getting COVID-19 itself.

Further adding to the dubitability of claims about vaccine safety, Biggs and Roy noted, is information from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

VAERS data shows that as of Oct. 14, 2022, there have been 57,166 reports of adverse events in children after they were given the vaccine. Of those, there are 161 reported deaths, 528 reported permanent disabilities, and 1,962 cases of myocarditis.

Despite research showing that natural immunity is more effective for preventing transmission of COVID-19 among children than vaccines, Biggs and Roy noted, “the CDC does not have guidance including natural immunity for this age.”

‘CDC Guidance Has Been Wrong Before’
Biggs and Roy also warned against too readily accepting CDC guidance, noting that past CDC recommendations have had devastating consequences on children’s mental health.

“CDC guidance has been wrong before—leading to terrible outcomes for children,” the duo wrote.

The Manhattan Institute estimates that guidance from the CDC calling for school closures led to around 100,000 public schools shuttering in-person classes for at least eight weeks.

Because of the consequences these decisions had on children’s development, Biggs and Roy said, “We now face a devastating mental health and substance abuse crisis among America’s youth.”

In 2020, CDC data shows, 1,006 teenagers died from drug- or alcohol-related causes—nearly twice as many as died in 2019. By contrast, 199 people under the age of 17 died from COVID-19 that year.

‘Actively Misled the American People’

Further, Biggs and Roy accused the CDC of misleading the American people.

“The CDC has also actively misled the American people throughout the COVID-19 pandemic,” they wrote.

The lawmakers cited the CDC’s controversial decision to change the definition of “vaccine” from “producing immunity” to “producing protection.”

In March 2022, the agency also chose to withhold hospitalization data by vaccine status, saying that the data might be misinterpreted. In June, the CDC reportedly decided to withhold information about the spread of COVID-19 in hospitals out of “fears of embarrassing the hospitals.”

In view of these factors, Biggs and Roy called for CDC leaders to be “questioned and fully scrutinized by Congress.”

“This recent decision by the CDC to include COVID-19 vaccines in the childhood vaccine schedule—and thereby pressuring states to implement this recommendation—should be questioned and fully scrutinized by Congress,” they wrote.

“No child should ever be faced with losing his or her education over a clearly and undeniably politicized vaccine,” they continued. “Every parent should have the full freedom to choose whether it makes sense for his or her child to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Decisions such as these are personal and do not require the ‘recommendation’ of the federal government.”

In closing, the lawmakers wrote: “As you consider the numerous failures of the public health apparatus, we strongly urge you to immediately investigate and hold to account the people responsible for brazen political decisions with the potential to impact our children with irreversible harm.

“The U.S. government should respect the decisions of American families, and not pressure States to issue an ultimatum that jeopardizes children’s access to primary and secondary education. Congress should ensure this is the case.”

The proposal by Roy and Biggs is the most recent in a line of potential investigations that Republicans could pursue if they retake the House.

Other proposed investigations could look into Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) role in leaving the Capitol unprepared on Jan. 6, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’s handling of southern border security, and Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Ukrainian energy firm Burisma.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-republicans-call-for-investigation-into-politically-motivated-cdc-decisions-during-covid_4825370.html

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

CDC Latest VISION Network Real World Evidence: Not Great News for COVID-19 Vaccines & Immunocompromised During Omicron BA.5 Surge

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) organized another study based on its VISION Network, tapping into what is claimed as the first real-world data look at mRNA vaccine effectiveness during the Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 surge involving immunocompromised adults. A sizable study covering multiple regions of the United States, the CDC reports positive findings associated with the COVID-19 vaccination program involving immunocompromised adults.

The unfortunate news is that at best, the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, including boosters, are providing moderate protection, and vaccine-neutralizing antibodies wane substantially over time. Immunocompromised patients must work with providers to find additional ways to bolster protection against COVID-19.

Background

Covering the duration of the spring and summer 2022, BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron subvariants surged to dominate the SARS-CoV-2 variants in circulation, so much so that a special booster developed to target these pathogens was released into the market before clinical trial data could be collected.

At this time, there were four total doses available, the two primary series and two booster doses all involving mRNA shots from either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna.

What about the VISION Network? As TrialSite has reported, the CDC set this network up involving several U.S. healthcare systems as well as the Regenstrief Institute affiliated with Indian University to assess COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.

What’s the core study findings?

Based on real-world data, the VISION Network covers large health systems across the United States. The study team was able to tap into and review the medical records of 30,000 immunocompromised adults. They found defense against COVID-19 associated hospitalizations was 34 percent after two vaccine doses, increasing to 71 percent during days 7 to 89 after a third dose, then declining to 41 percent 90 days or more after that dose. This means that after 3 months, the decline markedly goes down. TrialSite has reviewed comparable data for the immunocompromised where protection dives into teens and even negative territory in the ensuing months.

Although immunocompromised adults received increased protection after a third dose of the vaccine, this study found that vaccine effectiveness in this population remains lower than in the larger population of all adults.

The VISION investigators report vaccine effectiveness in the immunocompromised group was lowest among persons with sold organ or stem cell transplants or hematologic malignancies such as leukemia, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma.

What are the implications for low vaccine effectiveness among the identified groups?

The study authors report a combination of elements that need to be considered, including the use of non-pharmaceutical interventions, from use of masks to prophylactic antibody treatment as well as anti-viral treatments. Once a person gets infected with SARS-CoV-2 all are important tools that can confer additional protection against the novel coronavirus in the targeted population.

What’s a PI point of view?

Brian Dixon, PhD, MPA of the Regenstrief Institute and Indiana University Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, is part of the VISION Network, and a co-author of the study. Dixon reports, “This study confirms that even with boosters, immunocompromised adults, because of their weakened immune systems, are still at high risk of moderate to severe COVID. While vaccines in the general adult population have been found to be 70 to 90 percent effective, for the immunocompromised we’re looking at a much lower range -- 34 to 71 percent effective.”

Dixon continued:

“Those with healthy immune systems should keep in mind that we are a community with a responsibility to keep fellow community members, who are immunocompromised or have other conditions that place them at higher risk for COVID, even with vaccination, protected by taking precautions like hand hygiene and mask wearing, especially when transmission rates are high. We need to look out for one another.”

Shaun Grannis, MD, MS, a physician-scientist with Regenstrief Institute and Indiana University School of Medicine also went on the record:

“This higher risk group has been taking precautions and should continue to work with their providers to access needed tools to protect themselves. Immunocompromised individuals should consult their physician with any questions regarding remaining up to date with COVID vaccinations to optimize their protection. Adults with immunocompromising conditions and other populations have specific questions about the pandemic and vaccine effectiveness. Our findings in this study are a step forward in helping to answer these questions.”

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/cdc-latest-vision-network-real-world-evidence-not-great-news-for-covid-19-vaccines-immunocompromised-during-omicron-ba.5-surge-01891959

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

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

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

Posted by JR at 9:14 PM 0 comments

Monday, October 31, 2022


CDC Officials Told They Spread Misinformation but Still Didn’t Issue Correction

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials were alerted that they spread misinformation about child COVID-19 deaths but still did not issue corrections, according to emails obtained by The Epoch Times.

Drs. Katherine Fleming-Dutra and Sara Oliver were told within days of presenting to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, in June that statistics from a preprint study they shared were wrong, the emails show. But after internal discussion about how to respond, neither the CDC nor the officials corrected the false information.

Fleming-Dutra and Oliver both referenced the study, which has not been peer reviewed, while the CDC’s advisers weighed whether to recommend the agency grant emergency authorization for COVID-19 vaccines for babies and toddlers.

The committee ultimately recommended the CDC authorize Pfizer and Moderna shots for children as young as 6 months of age and the CDC quickly accepted the recommendation.

A week later, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky appeared to cite the false statistics while urging parents to get their children vaccinated, despite no evidence the vaccines protect against severe illness and despite the clinical trials returning substandard or unreliable results for shielding against infection.

Kelley Krohnert, a citizen researcher and mother who flagged the preprint, triggered the internal discussions among CDC officials, according to the emails. When Krohnert pointed Fleming-Dutra to a blog post that detailed the issues with the study, Fleming-Dutra sent the email to others, including Oliver.

“I am not sure who this should go through. Let me know what I need to do,” Fleming-Dutra said.

Megan Freedman, a CDC health communications specialist, looped in a CDC spokeswoman, and they informed Fleming-Dutra that she and other subject matter experts “would need to determine if there’s any validity to the complaint.” If the complaint was deemed valid, possible next steps might include pulling the slide or adding a footnote, Freedman said.

Oliver jumped in, saying that Krohnert “appears [redacted], but there are my thoughts.” Her thoughts were redacted.

“I’m sure you guys can make it sound prettier, but something like this would be how I would respond,” Oliver said. “And the general sentiment that ‘even 1 death from COVID that’s preventable is too many, regardless of how you count them.'”

There’s no evidence any of the COVID-19 vaccines prevent death for small children.

“Love it – thank you for sending!!!” Freedman said.

A separate thread started after the Washington Post forwarded Krohnert’s email over a Post article that said COVID-19 is “a leading cause of death” among children. The article still links to Fleming-Dutra’s slide, which in turn referenced the preprint.

Kristen Nordlund, a CDC spokesperson, sent the email to Fleming-Dutra, who forwarded it to Oliver.

“Kristen: [redacted]. Hope that helps?” Oliver replied.

“Thanks Sara! [redacted]. And really, I think the bottom line (which lots of ACIP members said today) is any death in a child (regardless of where it ranks on a list) is one too many,” Nordlund replied.

Dr. Jeffrey Duchin, health officer in Washington state’s Seattle and King counties, sent a link to Krohnert’s blog post to Oliver, Fleming-Dutra, and two CDC advisers, Drs. Matthew Daley—who also shared the misinformation—and Grace Lee.

“Great work today, as always. No doubt you’ve seen this and similar critiques of the mortality data presented. Will there be a response from CDC?” Duchin asked.

Correction

Seth Flaxman, a professor in Oxford University’s Department of Computer Science, and other researchers corrected the preprint after Krohnert flagged the issues to them. Their paper relied on death certificate statistics from the CDC. They initially said at least 1,433 deaths among people 19 and younger in the United States were attributed to COVID-19, but acknowledged in the updated version that the number was just 1,088.

The initial version “incorrectly used” the death certificate data, the authors said.

That sent the rank of COVID-19 among causes of death for children down. For infants under 1, for instance, it went from fifth to eighth.

Months later, Fleming-Dutra’s slide remains uncorrected, and nobody at the CDC has ever publicly acknowledged sharing the misinformation.

Fleming-Dutra, Oliver, Freedman, Nordlund, Daley, and the CDC did not respond to requests for comment.

A spokesperson for Duchin’s agency told The Epoch Times via email that the CDC replied to him in June.

The CDC “noted that the ACIP considers a multitude of data points in making their recommendations, so even if this specific pre-print paper was removed from consideration, the data overwhelmingly support COVID-19 as a cause of serious disease and death in young children, and COVID vaccines as an important way to prevent this,” the spokesperson said. “These ACIP decisions are made after reviewing the totality of the data and it is never one singular data point or analysis used.”

A spokesperson for the Stanford University School of Medicine, which employs Lee, declined to comment.

Lee promoted the false statistics during a meeting in September, and the official webpage for the committee she heads still lists the uncorrected figures. A spokesperson for the panel did not return an inquiry.

The Epoch Times obtained the emails through a Freedom of Information Act request.

‘Very Strange’

The confirmation that the CDC officials were made aware of spreading misinformation but did nothing is “super frustrating,” Krohnert said.

“They had all this internal discussion about the criticism and still the CDC director gets on TV and spouts the same criticized data,” she told The Epoch Times. “And at that point, Flaxman even said he was going to be updating their report.”

None of the CDC officials have ever replied to Krohnert.

The analysis from the British researchers utilized CDC data. It took Krohnert under an hour to run the same numbers. The Epoch Times also examined the data on the CDC’s site, corroborating Krohnert’s analysis. It’s unclear why the CDC scientists didn’t do the same.

“I don’t understand why they don’t seem to know how to use their own resources,” Krohnert said. “It’s very strange.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-cdc-officials-told-they-spread-misinformation-but-still-didnt-issue-correction-emails_4826960.html

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

PARIS: A prominent French physician has won a stunning victory against charges that he denigrated official covid policies, with the French Order of Physicians holding that he was in fact obliged to speak out.

In its ruling, the French governing body for doctors found that Christian Perronne, 67, acted in the best interest of citizens and his profession in critiquing covid treatments and vaccines on social media, in national television interviews, and in a best-selling book.

“Dr. Perronne, an internationally recognized expert in the field of infectious diseases, was best placed to understand public health issues,” the translated decision stated. “If he spoke in the press about the action of the government and the pharmaceutical industry—as he was legitimate to do and even had the obligation to do so in this area which fell within his competence—he confined himself to publicly, but without invective, a discordant voice on a subject of general interest.”

In March 2020, as covid was exploding, Perronne emailed me a hugely encouraging study by Dr. Didier Raoult on successful treatment of covid with an old antimalarial drug, hydroxychloroquine. We both thought covid could quickly be tamed. But when President Trump “fast-tracked” the drug a day after my article on Forbes.com, the safe, generic treatment began a slow and tragic slide toward mainstream ridicule and rejection.

Perronne went on to sharply criticize the French government’s covid approach, including in a highly successful book entitled Is there a mistake THEY didn’t make?: COVID-19: the sacred union of incompetence and arrogance. The book, and statements Perronne made in a whirlwind of media interviews, soon got him into trouble with French medical authorities, which he believes was at the behest of French President Emmanuel Macron.

“At the beginning I understood things were going in the wrong way,” Perronne told me. Having served for a decade as overseer, variously, of the nation’s communicable disease, health security, and vaccine review commissions, “I think I knew how to manage such problems.”

Among Perronne’s other qualifications, he was vice president of the European Technical Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization for six years, which provides independent review and expertise on vaccines for the World Health Organization.

The Inquisition

Ten days before the ruling that absolved him, Perronne and I met for an interview in a Paris home, where my hostess, a retired physician, had read Perronne’s book, and a neighbor happily recognized him on the street as he was arriving. Perronne was facing the loss of his license to practice medicine based on complaints both by the Order of Physicians and an independent doctor who felt he had been attacked by Perronne.

Leading up to the charges, Perronne had found himself transformed. He had once been an esteemed public health expert, member of the infectious diseases faculty at the University of Versailles at Saint-Quentin, and one-time president of a professional society of infectious disease experts. But suddenly, he was a “charlatan,” he said.

“I was Galileo in front of the Inquisition tribunal,” he said of the September 13 hearing in the Disciplinary Chamber of the Order of Physicians. It nonetheless left him hopeful. In a huge show of support, an estimated 3,000 people had turned out in the streets outside the tribunal. “An extraordinary crowd was present,” the news outlet FranceSoir reported in a tweet with videos of cheering, sign-carrying admirers:

At the proceeding itself, Perronne sensed that his interrogators were going through the motions. “They were rather kind,” he said. “I think they were embarrassed with this affair.”

In an announcement of Perronne’s “complete victory,” his attorney, Thomas Benages, hailed the tribunal’s finding that doctors are entitled to debate and criticize health policies.

“By these fundamental decisions, the Disciplinary Chamber has reaffirmed the freedom of expression enjoyed by university doctors,” Benages wrote, “while highlighting the preponderant role played by Professor Perronne during the health crisis by bringing contradiction to the government and having”—as the decision stated—“‘a discordant voice on a subject of general interest.’ ”

The tribunal’s finding did not specifically endorse Perronne’s views, but rather his right to speak them. I asked him what he thought of the ruling.

“You can just say that I am very happy, since the Disciplinary chamber wrote that in view of my national and international expertise, I had not only the right to give a divergent opinion from the official policy, but it was an obligation for me to speak out, if I did not agree!

This statement is fantastic.”

As his lawyer wrote, “the Disciplinary Chamber simply came to reaffirm the values of our democracy.”

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/exonerated-in-france-one-persecuted-doctor-triumphs-over-covid-repression-686d8790

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

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 <b>(IMMIGRATION WATCH)</b>

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

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

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


Posted by JR at 9:03 PM 0 comments

Sunday, October 30, 2022


Italy Plans to Allow Unvaccinated Health Care Workers to Return to Work

Italian health care workers who have been suspended for rejecting COVID-19 vaccines will soon be able to return to work, the European country’s top health official said Friday.

Orazio Schillaci, who was appointed last week by Italy’s newly formed ruling coalition to lead the Ministry of Health, said his administration is working on a measure that would reinstate unvaccinated doctors and nurses before the end of the year.

“Six months after the suspension of the state of emergency and in consideration of the level of COVID-19 contagion, Health Minister Orazio Schillaci considers it necessary to initiate a progressive return to normality in activity and behavior, based on criteria of responsibility and respect for the laws in force,” a statement on the ministry’s website read.

Schillaci also announced that the ministry will no longer provide a daily bulletin with numbers of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Instead, that information will be updated on a weekly basis.

Friday’s announcement, at least in part, is tied to the “worrying shortage of medical personnel,” according to the ministry.

The changes mark a departure from the policies of Schillaci’s predecessor, Roberto Speranza, who allowed hospital employers to suspend without pay any employee who refused to get vaccinated.

Under Speranza and previous Prime Minister Mario Draghi, whose government imploded in the midst of an energy crisis and a worsening economic outlook, all public and private sector workers must get a COVID “green pass” before they go to work. Italians who ignore the order and go to work without proof of vaccination or a negative test or recovery from the virus are suspended on no pay and fined up to 1,500 euros (about $1,500).

The “green pass” policy was considered to be among the most restrictive in Europe. While some European countries have made COVID vaccines mandatory for their health workers, none have implemented a vaccine passport system for all employees.

“We are making these choices in order to restrict the unvaccinated as much as possible, as this is what is causing the burden on our hospital system,” Speranza told media outlets earlier this year.

The new prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, has vowed to not inherit the Draghi administration’s pandemic response, saying that despite the harsh restrictions placed on millions of citizens, the country nevertheless suffered the highest COVID death and infection rates in Europe.

“Something clearly didn’t work there,” Meloni said Tuesday in her very first speech to parliament as prime minister. “That’s why I want to say that in no way will we imitate this model.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/italy-plans-to-allow-unvaccinated-health-care-workers-to-return-to-work_4827661.html

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

Arizona’s Kari Lake makes midterm waves as Republican’s new star

Arizonans know that their state, which flipped to Joe Biden in the 2020 election by the narrowest of margins, marking the beginning of the end for Donald Trump’s presidency, has become the nation’s political bellwether.

A red wave here next month would spell doom for the Democrats, who are defending wafer-thin majorities in the House of Representatives and Senate in US midterm elections on November 8. Their loss would end the Biden administration’s ability to legislate without the agreement of Republicans.

No governor’s race this midterm election has attracted as much attention as Arizona’s. The US media has become obsessed with Lake – they appear to hate her – knowing full well her victory would usher in a new Trump-like political force.

“If she wins next month, she will immediately vault to the top of potential vice-presidential candidates in ’24,” says Barrett Marson, a veteran Republican political strategist based in Arizona. For what it’s worth, Lake, a married mother of two teenage children, could well run for president one day if she wins.

“She’s one of the most compelling figures in the world right now,” says Amy Foto, a supporter and public school teacher of 25 years, who was visiting Phoenix from Denver.

Lake, 53, has leveraged her fame as a 22-year Arizona nightly news anchor and former Democrat seemingly with no political inclinations, to transform into a high-profile political machine with national ambitions. That Youngkin, who has already won a powerful office, travelled five hours across the country to campaign with Lake points to her ascendancy within the Republican Party.

“I’m Republican, I’m hard-core, I love the new Republican Party,” says Lake, emerging in her trademark perfectly cropped hair and a one-piece yellow suit, and beaming to the crowd, liberally dotted with cowboy hats.

Last year she quit media, joined the Republican Party, and two months ago edged out the local establishment Republican candidate in a closely fought primary in August, winning Trump’s fawning approval.

Lake’s growing appeal might even pull the state’s Republican Senate candidate, 35-year-old Blake Masters, across the line against incumbent Democrat senator and “fundraising juggernaut”, former astronaut Mark Kelly, who has raised $US75m for his re-election campaign, more than five times as much as Masters.

“The adverts are just killers, and yet he’s within striking distance,” political strategist Marson says. For Democrats, Lake has become the dangerous face of the hard “MAGA right”, a Trump acolyte, a threat to democracy itself and the face of the new Republicans.

Lake, for her diehard and rapidly growing Republican fan base, personifies the future of the party along with Youngkin and Florida Governor Ron Desantis, and looks set to become governor of the 14th largest US state, succeeding well-liked incumbent Doug Ducey, who has reached the state’s eight-year term limit for governor.

Dismissed as “Trump in heels” by her critics, it’s hard not to be impressed with Lake, whatever you think of her politics: faultlessly articulate and immaculately turned-out, she commands attention.

“When Kari Lake walks into a room, all eyes turn to Kari Lake. She is one of those people,” The Washington Post recently conceded.

Lake is ahead of her Democrat rival, Katie Hobbs, 48.5 per cent to 45.7 per cent, according to the latest average of relevant state polls compiled by FiveThirtyEight, a gap that has been steadily growing.

PredictIt, an online betting agency, gives her an 84 per cent chance of winning, up from 50 per cent two months ago.

“I think we’ve done more events today than Katie Hobbs has done in the whole campaign,” says Lake, fresh from six events earlier that day, mocking her quietly spoken, reclusive opponent.

Hobbs, 52, the incumbent Arizona Secretary of State, has refused to debate Lake, saying she does not want to give her Republican opponent, who has refused to concede Trump lost the 2020 elections, a “platform”.

A more likely explanation is Hobbs fears being ripped to shreds.

“(Lake) believes in everything I believe in: securing our borders, secure elections, she cares about the immigration crisis and a better education for our kids,” supporter Rachel Truse told me, as the Rolling Stones’ Start Me Up and then Laura Branigan’s Gloria boomed in the background at the rally.

The half-dozen supporters I spoke to decried high inflation, the politicisation of the public school curriculum, excessive taxation and especially the scourge of fentanyl, a deadly narcotic streaming across the Mexican border into the US in ever larger quantities that has killed more than 71,000 Americans last year – up 25 per cent from the previous year.

“Maybe we can take that to the border on day one; I’m not a pilot but I’ll be happy to sit back,” Lake says, promising to “declare an invasion” if she wins.

Arizona, at the border with Mexico, has borne the brunt, along with Texas, of the extraordinary surge in illegal immigrants that has dominated US politics for more than a year.

US officials arrested 227,000 illegal migrants in September, a 11 per cent jump compared with August, bringing the annual total to 2.4 million, 37 per cent more than the year before.

“This is the best Republican midterm backdrop in decades,” Marson says. “Dems may have the money, but they don’t have the economy on their side,” he adds, referring to the Democrats’ traditional financial advantage. Inflation is Americans’ No.1 concern, according to polls leading into midterms. Phoenix, Arizona’s biggest city, with about 4.5 million people and geographically double the size of Greater Sydney, has endured 13 per cent inflation, the highest of any big American city.

It isn’t entirely a Republican love-in in the aircraft hangar. Software programmer Andy, 23, reluctant to share his full name, says he’s still on the fence about Lake. “We need lower taxes, and I like school choice, which is a big issue, but sowing distrust in the election is really dangerous,” he told me.

Lake’s refusal to concede Trump’s loss, and support for the former president whose future is under a cloud as multiple political and legal inquiries take their toll, has dogged her campaign, at least among mainstream media.

“She can’t; she’s stuck to him like glue, their brands are intertwined,” Marson says, dismissing my suggestion that Lake, who did not mention Trump once at the rally but name-checked Ronald Reagan twice, might be trying to pivot. “We’re the leading state in election deniers,” Marson says.

Lake has not conceded she will accept defeat, citing as evidence a plethora of unfounded claims the Arizona electoral system is not trustworthy. Indeed, only this week, Republicans claimed Democrats were intimidating voters.

To Lake’s credit, she does talk a lot about concrete policy proposals, even if most media only want her to deny, once again, over and over, the 2020 election result. Her platform includes abolishing the state’s rent and grocery taxes, which average 2.7 and 2.8 per cent, respectively.

“We’re funding students, not schools; you can pick their own school. If they teach garbage to our kids, we can take them out – that’s the fastest way to turn our schools around,” Lake says, referring to a revolutionary education policy just enacted in the state that has enraged public sector teachers unions.

Parents, even those who choose to homeschool their children, receive about $US7000 a year a child, which they can spend on whatever school or tutors they want. It could destroy, in time, the US public education system, which has come under repeated attack during the Covid-19 pandemic for keeping schools shut for more than a year.

National polls suggest Democrats’ key political messages – warnings about the risk to abortion rights and the spectre of “semi-fascism” if Trump-backed Republicans win – have not cut through to an electorate worried about bread-and-butter issues of inflation, crime and immigration.

“It’s all bullshit,” Bill Truse, Rachel Truse’s husband, tells me when I ask if he is worried about Lake’s refusal to concede that Trump lost the 2020 election.

“Dems have been denying elections for years; Hillary (Clinton) denied Trump beat her, that woman in Georgia, I don’t care about it,” he adds, referring to high-profile Democrat Stacey Abrams, who is running for governor in Georgia.

“What did Benjamin Franklin say at 81? You have a republic …” Lake says, as she wraps up her remarks, encouraging the crowd to finish the apparently famous quote. “If you can keep it,” the audience answers, suggesting her audience is more educated than it is typically given credit for.

Trump’s still extraordinary political power is in its winter. Lake, if she wins, will almost certainly supplant Trump in the Republican party: younger, more articulate, more compelling and more attractive. 

“It’s sad because Denver doesn’t have a chance, it’s hopeless in Colorado,” Foto tells me, walking back to her car after the rally, blaming migrating Californians for rendering the GOP irrelevant in her home state.

Maybe with Lake at the helm of the party, that might change.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/arizonas-kari-lake-makes-midterm-waves-as-republicans-new-star/news-story/53705ba37627ce39e711a690f8efe4f4

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

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 <b>(IMMIGRATION WATCH)</b>

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

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

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



Posted by JR at 9:00 PM 0 comments

Friday, October 28, 2022


New fast spreading Covid variant arrives in Australia

A rapidly-spreading new “nightmare” Covid variant has hit Australia’s shores but experts say we should not panic.

The XBB strain, which is resistant to vaccines and antibodies from previous infections, emerged in Singapore a few weeks ago. Within a week, it went from making up one fifth of the country’s Covid cases to more than a half.

In Australia, there were 31,636 new cases of Covid reported in the week to October 25 — an increase of 2.2 per cent.

In NSW, there were 10,050 cases of Covid reported in the week ending October 27 — an increase of 13.7 per cent. There were 820 people in hospital and 16 deaths.

NSW detected 21 cases of XBB variant in the week ending October 15 and it made up 6.4 per cent of PCR tests subject to genomic analysis, a tenfold increase since the first cases were found on October 1.

In Victoria, cases surged by 24.7 per cent to 8537 in the week ending October 28 and hospitalisation rose 20.3 per cent to 172 patients. Seven lives were lost on average each day to Covid.

“Surveillance shows the presence of multiple Omicron subvariants in Victoria including rapid growth of (the Omicron subvariant) BQ. 1 and XBB in the past month, with a combined prevalence of approximately 10 per cent in wastewater and clinical sample,” Victoria’s chief health officer Professor Brett Sutton said in his latest update.

“Continued growth at these rates would see these subvariants overtake BA. 5 as the dominant varian.”

In Queensland, there were 4447 cases of Covid reported in the week to October 25, with 105 people in hospital and 18 people dying.

These jurisdictions do not report Covid variants.

Australian National University infectious diseases expert Professor Peter Collignon said so far, there was no evidence XBB was “more virulent, as judged by hospitalisations and deaths”.

And Deakin University infectious diseases expert Professor Catherine Bennett stressed Australians would have a stronger hybrid immunity to new variants, unlike the lead up to last Christmas when the Omicron and Delta strains ran wild.

“More than half the population has been both vaccinated and had an infection, and that does put you in a more resilient position in when facing future waves,” Professor Bennett said.

Professor Collignon estimated “80 per cent of Australians have had Covid”.

“We won’t see the same high hospitalisation and high death numbers that we saw between December and July, because that’s when all the variants were circulating and people were basically getting infected for the first time,” Professor Collignon said.

Around 64 per cent of current Covid cases analysed in Australia are of the Omicron subvariant BA. 5 — down from 71 per cent of cases at the end of September.

Researchers in China found XBB can escape the antibodies generated by a BA. 5 infection.

This means it is also likely to outwit the latest bivalent vaccines which protect against Omicron, as well as the original Wuhan variant.

Infectious disease specialist Maria Van Kerkhove, who works on the Covid-19 response at the World Health Organisation, posted a video to Twitter last week raising concerns about the XBB variant.

“We do know that this recombinant has a significant growth advantage, all of the sub-variants of Omicron are showing increased transmissibility and properties of immune escape,” Dr Van Kerkhove said.

Another new variant, detected in NSW, was the BQ. 1.1, which made up 3.3 per cent of cases that were subjected to genomic testing. In the US, surveillance showed BQ. 1.1 was spreading, accounting for 11 per cent of recent cases.

All up, the World Health Organisation has detected more than 300 variants of Covid that are circulating.

Dr Van Kerkhove expressed concerns, shared by Professors Collignon and Bennett, that systematic surveillance of Covid was declining.

“Surveillance has declined, testing has declined, sequencing has declined and that in turn has limited our ability as an organisation with our expert networks around the world to assess these,” Dr Van Kerkhove said.

Professors Collignon and Bennett are calling for a co-ordinated national Covid surveillance program involving regular sewage testing and tracking of patients with upper respiratory conditions presenting to hospitals and GPs.

Older Australians and immunocompromised Australians are entering a period when their fourth Covid vaccine is beginning to wear off 3-4 months after they received it and are being urged to mask up.

Health Minister Mark Butler said last week the Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation – ATAGI – was not likely to provide advice on whether the elderly and immunocompromised should have a fifth Covid vaccine until next year.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/coronavirus/new-fast-spreading-covid-variant-arrives-in-australia/news-story/359d28531f253ba09463240cd544fddf

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

CDC Pushed for COVID-19 Boosters Without Clinical Trials

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) pressured U.S. regulators to clear COVID-19 boosters without clinical trial data, according to newly released emails.

CDC officials relayed to counterparts at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in early August 2021 that they wanted authorization for Moderna and Pfizer boosters as data began showing that the vaccines weren’t working as well as initially promoted.

The conversation took place on a call that was described by Dr. Phil Krause, a top FDA official, to several other FDA workers.

“Take a deep breath before reading this next paragraph. On that call, the CDC evidently stated that they will assemble all the data they are aware of on third dosing in this setting and send it to us in the hope that we will (very soon) authorize the third dose for immunocompromised as part of the EUA,” Krause wrote in the Aug. 5, 2021, email (pdf).

EUA stands for emergency use authorization.

All of the COVID-19 vaccines were authorized under emergency conditions at that time.

No boosters had been authorized and no clinical data were available for the boosters.

The emails show that “the CDC wanted the booster approved without a trial,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, wrote on Twitter.

The CDC didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Krause was responding to Doran Fink, who also works for the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, charged with evaluating vaccines.

Fink sent along a post that had been made to an infectious diseases forum regarding whether doctors should be giving additional vaccine doses to patients with compromised immune systems despite the lack of authorization.

Dr. Richard Nathan of Idaho had written that other countries, including Israel, had cleared boosters.

“Pfizer recommends it and I trust their guidance over the turmoil at our federal agencies. With millions of doses of vaccine set to expire, you should do what you think is best for your patients. I can’t believe you would get pushback from anyone. Keep in mind, nearly everyone in this group is six to seven months out from the second dose of the vaccine and many have significant daily exposure to the virus,” Nathan wrote.

Fink said the post “accurately reflects more widespread thinking that I am hearing in other forums as well,” including among doctors who advise the CDC on vaccines.

“Providers are losing confidence in FDA/CDC to do the right thing for their patients,” Fink said.

Less than two weeks later, the FDA authorized boosters for certain people, including immunocompromised persons.

The agency said that “a thorough review of the available data” concluded the group “may benefit” from a third dose.

The only data cited on efficacy were from two studies, one conducted by French researchers and another by Canadian researchers. Pfizer and Moderna hadn’t completed trials.

“As we’ve previously stated, other individuals who are fully vaccinated are adequately protected and do not need an additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine at this time,” Dr. Janet Woodcock, the FDA’s top official said.

But just weeks later, Woodcock and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s top official, signed onto a joint statement saying that vaccine protection was waning and that boosters “will be needed to maximize vaccine-induced protection and prolong its durability.”

In September 2021, the FDA and CDC authorized Pfizer boosters for many other Americans. The authorization was expanded to Moderna and Johnson & Johnson shots, and virtually all other Americans, later in the year.

Krause and Dr. Marion Gruber resigned from their positions because of opposition to the booster strategy.

Judicial Watch obtained the newly published emails as part of ongoing litigation against the Biden administration for not properly responding to a Freedom of Information Act request.

An earlier tranche of emails showed that Gruber was “very concerned” in late August 2021 about pressure from companies such as Pfizer over vaccine authorization.

“We need to be given time to consider their data and cannot be pushed by these companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense,” Gruber wrote to Dr. Peter Marks, a top FDA official.

“These FDA records further document top officials’ concerns about the controversial COVID-19 booster shots,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “That it has taken months and a federal lawsuit to uncover this critical material is a scandal.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/cdc-pushed-for-covid-19-boosters-without-clinical-trials-emails_4821710.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

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

Posted by JR at 10:47 PM 0 comments

Thursday, October 27, 2022


Looking back:



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

New York Supreme Court Reinstates Unvaccinated Employees With Back Pay

A New York judge ordered Monday that Department of Sanitation employees terminated for refusing to get vaccinated be reinstated to their full employment status, writing that the vaccination mandate for city employees was “not just about safety and public health; it was about compliance.”

Judge Ralph J. Porzio wrote in his ruling that if the vaccine mandate was about “safety and public health, unvaccinated workers would have been placed on leave the moment the order was issued.”

“If it was about safety and public health, the Health Commissioner would have issued city-wide mandates for vaccination for all residents,” he continued. “In a City with a nearly 80% vaccination rate, we shouldn’t be penalizing the people who showed up to work, at great risk to themselves and their families, while we were locked down.”

Porzio’s ruling states that the Oct. 20, 2021, and Dec. 13, 2021, rulings from the commissioner of health and mental hygiene ordering that all employees get vaccinated are “arbitrary and capricious,” ordering that the petitioners be reinstated to their full employment status, and entitled to back pay in salary from date of termination.

“Yesterday marked a historic victory for sanitation workers, all the brave NYC employees who serve the public and our representative democracy,” attorney Chad LaVeglia told The Daily Signal. “The court struck down NYC’s draconian, arbitrary, vaccine mandate on multiple constitutional and legal grounds. The thousands of city employees who were ignored now have a voice. And as the court recognized, they deserve better.”

“The court also recognized a commonsense principle that has somehow eluded politicians like Eric Adams: Forcing one—and only one—segment of the population to get vaccinated during a worldwide outbreak is unconstitutional and arbitrary,” he added. “Sixteen sanitation workers fought back against tyranny. And won. This is a historic victory for individual rights, and the system of government mandated by the Constitution.”

https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/10/25/new-york-supreme-court-reinstates-unvaccinated-employees-with-backpay

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

Judge Orders Fauci, Psaki, Top Officials Be Deposed in Big Tech Censorship Case

A federal court ordered on Oct. 21 that Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top officials testify under oath at depositions in a case that has uncovered evidence of alleged federal government collusion with Big Tech companies to censor users.

The attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri and other plaintiffs allege that Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser, and other defendants colluded and coerced social media companies to “suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content” regarding COVID-19.

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty went a step further than a previous ruling that forced written testimonies and ordered Fauci and other defendants to testify under oath at depositions.

“After finding documentation of a collusive relationship between the Biden Administration and social media companies to censor free speech, we immediately filed a motion to get these officials under oath,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said in a statement.

“It is high time we shine a light on this censorship enterprise and force these officials to come clean to the American people, and this ruling will allow us to do just that. We’ll keep pressing for the truth.”

The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) joined the lawsuit in August, representing renowned epidemiologists Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines.

NCLA attorney Jenin Younes said she looks forward to learning just how far the accused government officials went to push their COVID-19 “perspective.”

“For the first time, Dr. Fauci and seven other federal officials responsible for running an unlawful censorship enterprise will have to answer questions under oath about the nature and extent of their communications with tech companies,” Younes said in a statement to The Epoch Times.

Doughty also ordered the depositions of former White House press secretary Jen Psaki, White House Director of Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director Jen Easterly, and FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan.

Fauci’s ‘Self-Serving Blanket Denials’

In his ruling, Doughty said he agreed with plaintiffs that Fauci’s previous “self-serving blanket denials” about his role in censoring views on social media couldn’t be taken at face value.

“Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci can prove he never communicated with social media platforms about censorship, there are compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries, and acted on behalf of others, in procuring the social-media censorship of credible scientific opinions,” Doughty said in his ruling (pdf). “Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci acted indirectly or as an intermediary on behalf of others, it is still relevant to Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. The Court agrees.

“Lastly, Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Fauci’s credibility has been in question on matters related to supposed COVID-19 ‘misinformation’ since 2020. Specifically, Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of ‘gain-of-function’ virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory, and more.

“Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed. Plaintiffs assert that they should not be required to simply accept Dr. Fauci’s ‘self-serving blanket denials’ that were issued from someone other than himself at face value. The Court agrees.”

The plaintiffs argued that Fauci allegedly insisted on the censorship of “speech backed by great scientific credibility and with enormous potential nationwide impact” that contradicted his views.

For example, he communicated in a long-shielded phone call with some scientists to discredit any theory that COVID-19 was the result of a “lab leak” in Wuhan, China. The scientists went on to write a paper severely reprimanding others who were open to the theory.

If the lab leak theory were true, in turn, it would mean that Fauci could be potentially implicated in funding the research on viruses that caused the COVID-19 pandemic that killed millions of people worldwide, the plaintiffs argued. This is because he funded risky “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through intermediaries such as EcoHealth Alliance.

In late January 2020 and early February 2020, Fauci was also in touch with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in oral communications about the government’s COVID-19 response. Facebook then allegedly went on censor the lab leak theory, according to the plaintiffs.

‘Overwhelming’ Need to Depose Officials

The court also found that Flaherty, Psaki, Andy Slavitt, and other officials also have personal knowledge about the alleged censorship issues and ordered them to be deposed.

Doughty said there’s an “overwhelming” need for Flaherty to be deposed to determine whether fundamental rights to free speech were “abridged” as a result of alleged collusion between senior Biden administration officials and Big Tech.

The plaintiffs argued that Flaherty had “extensive” oral meetings with Twitter, Meta, and YouTube on vaccine hesitancy and combatting misinformation related to COVID-19.

The judge said there’s a “substantive need” for the deposition of Slavitt, who served as the White House’s senior COVID-19 adviser. Doughty noted that Slavitt’s remarks on a podcast “showed he has specific knowledge as it relates” to the issues in the lawsuit.

The court order cited a series of public comments made by Psaki when she served as White House press secretary, including calling on social media platforms for consistency in banning disfavored speakers.

“Psaki has made a number of statements that are relevant to the Government’s involvement in a number of social-media platforms’ efforts to censor its users across the board for sharing information related to COVID-19,” Doughty said in his ruling.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-orders-fauci-psaki-top-officials-be-deposed-in-big-tech-censorship-case_4813336.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

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



Posted by JR at 3:20 PM 0 comments

Wednesday, October 26, 2022


Confidence through censorship: The (medical) Ministry of Truth

On Wednesday, October 12, the Queensland Labor government – with support from the LNP opposition – passed a dystopian and dangerous bill.

The Health Practitioner Regulation National Law and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 refocuses the guiding principles of medicine to prioritise public confidence over public health and safety. It allows bureaucrats to name and shame doctors, a move which the AMA described as ‘incoherent zealotry’.

This bill, if passed by other jurisdictions in Australia, will essentially legislate national medical censorship as a means to ensure public confidence in government health services.

Adherence to the Good Medical Practice code of conduct means that advocating for patients (which is our primary concern) is being overridden by external demands to comply with public health messaging. Our code of conduct is predicated on The Hippocratic Oath, the Declaration of Geneva, and the International Code of Ethics which outlines our dedication to serving humanity: To first do no harm, making our patients our primary consideration.

Political-based medicine has now replaced evidence-based medicine.

History has proven that unquestioning compliance to government directives is dangerous. In 1947, the World Medical Association agreements were formed in the aftermath of the second world war due to the gross systematic human rights abuses which took place under enforced national laws. Tragically, the political currents in Australia appear to be heading towards bureaucratic medical compliance enforced through regulatory threats, soon to be legislative threats.

In 2015, the federal government passed The Australian Border Force Act 2015 which made doctors who advocated for their refugee patients liable to face up to two years imprisonment. Doctors for Refugees challenged this law in the High Court a year later. A major basis for their argument, according to their submission to the Medical Board’s 2018 Code of Conduct review, was that the Code doctors had sworn to uphold and advocate for the rights of their patients could not be overridden by the vagaries of domestic laws.

The government eventually backed down on this law and had that problematic section repealed.

Interestingly, their submission was in response to the Medical Board attempting to insert into the medical code the concerning phrase ‘doctors must comply with relevant laws’. The response to the word comply was fierce as the idea that the medical code of conduct could enforce compliance to political decree was antithetical to what doctors had sworn to uphold.

With the arrival of Covid came the bureaucratic decree through the March 9, 2021 joint statement by AHPRA and the National Boards that made undermining public confidence in the government’s Covid public health messaging equivalent to professional misconduct. Questioning ‘the message’ is now subject to investigation and disciplinary action, including immediate suspension of registration.

Letters received by practitioners who have questioned the government response to Covid are chilling in their implication. After being suspended by National Boards under the immediate action clauses for allegedly being a threat to public health and safety, they are accused of the crime of non-compliance. They are deemed a threat because they failed to comply with public health orders, undermined the Board’s position on the promotion of Covid vaccination, and undermined public confidence because their medical expert opinion contravened government health authorities.

In summary, health professionals are not permitted to question the ‘secret health advice’ without losing their registration to practise.

Consider that in response to Covid, our health bureaucracy overturned the medical industry’s well-researched 2019 pandemic preparedness plans – doing almost the total opposite of what was recommended by health professionals. Interestingly, Dr Rochelle Walensky, Director of the CDC, told employees recently: ‘To be frank, we are responsible for some pretty dramatic, pretty public mistakes from testing, to data, to communications.’

In December 2020, the FDA outlined, ‘At this time, data is not available to make a determination about how long the vaccine will provide protection, nor is there evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person.’ Our health bureaucrats, regulatory agencies, and politicians mandated provisionally approved vaccines by telling the population repeatedly that they stopped transmission and people were selfish granny killers if they didn’t get jabbed.

We, as health professionals, are not allowed to question government statements on transmission without losing our registration to practise.

On September 2021, a delegate of the Secretary of the Department of Health rescheduled ivermectin, in effect banning it for use as an off-label treatment option for Covid stating ‘subsection 52E(1) of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, in particular paragraph (f), which empowers the Secretary to act on any other matters that the Secretary considers necessary to protect public health’.

Ivermectin is one of the World Health Organisation’s list of essential medicines. It was fully approved by the TGA and found to be very safe according to their own 2013 Australian Public Assessment Report for Ivermectin. Two of the reasons the TGA gave for denying Australians access to a drug that showed great promise in the treatment and prevention of Covid-19 was that it was all of a sudden unsafe and its availability might dissuade people from getting vaccinated. Behaviour modification was undertaken, with the TGA appearing to act in partnership with other government nudge units to promote vaccination.

We as health professionals are not permitted to advocate for ivermectin without losing our registration to practice.

In July 2021, as Australians were being mandated through coercive techniques to get vaccinated with poorly tested provisionally approved gene-based vaccines that our Health bureaucrats and politicians repeatedly told us had been proven safe and effective, the TGA was amending the Therapeutic Goods Regulation Act to further reduce the safety and efficacy requirements for any medicine that is for the treatment or prevention of Covid. Not only do manufacturers have six years to provide the government with safety and efficacy data on these provisionally approved jabs, they also no longer have to demonstrate they could provide a greater benefit than other available medicines or that the medicine is likely to provide a major therapeutic advance.

We, as health professionals, are not allowed to question the safety and efficacy without losing our registration to practise.

Recently, the TGA has granted provisional approval to Moderna for the active immunisation and prevention of Covid in high-risk babies and young children. The report concluded the vaccinations had low levels of protective efficacy against infection, they didn’t know how long any efficacy lasted, and while the (Advisory Committee on Vaccines) recommended the provisional approval to children at high risk they noted high-risk children were excluded from the study. Across the world, pandemic policy and guidelines vary. Denmark is no longer recommending vaccination for people under 50, Norway no one under 65, but our regulatory body is expanding approvals to 6-month to 4-year-olds.

We, as health professionals, are not allowed to question this approval without losing our registration to practise.

Whenever governments want to enact laws to suppress free expression, censor and punish dissenters through threats to careers and livelihood, to control public perception as a means of creating confidence through enforced public ignorance, it is time to ask some serious questions.

If this bill passes nationally and the government becomes the single authority on all health advice, then unquestioning compliance becomes the new accepted standard of good medical practice. That is the end of medicine and the death of science. George Orwell’s Ministry of Truth has arrived. Public confidence in politicians and their bureaucrats should never come at the expense of people’s right to full, free, and unhindered access to scientific evidence and emerging data.

The Australian Medical Professionals Society is dedicated to fighting for medical free speech for the safety of those we swore to protect, our patients. Prioritising public confidence in government through censorship has led to what Professor Bhattacharya has said is the single biggest public health mistake in human history. With Dr Aseem Malhotra, a British Cardiologist, recently describing the mandates as ‘perhaps the greatest miscarriage of medical science we will witness in our lifetime’. We must stop medical censorship and allow doctors to be doctors. This bill is dangerous to the future of medicine and the health of our nation.

https://spectator.com.au/2022/10/confidence-through-censorship-the-medical-ministry-of-truth/

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

New Covid Boosters Aren’t Better Than Old Ones, Study Finds

Bivalent booster shots from Moderna Inc. and Pfizer Inc. failed to raise levels of protective proteins called neutralizing antibodies against the dominant omicron strains any more than four doses of the original Covid vaccine, according to an early independent study on a small group of people.

Researchers at Columbia University and the University of Michigan compared levels of neutralizing antibodies in blood samples from 21 people who got a fourth shot of the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech SE bivalent boosters against antibody levels in 19 people who got four shots of the original vaccines.

Three to five weeks after a fourth shot, those people who received the new boosters aimed at BA.4 and BA.5 variants “had similar neutralizing antibody titers as those receiving a fourth monovalent mRNA vaccine,” the authors conclude in a manuscript posted on the preprint server bioRxiv.org. This held true for antibodies that protect against BA.4, BA.5 and older variants such as the original omicron strain, according to the study.

Moderna shares rose 2.7% to $136.57 at the close in New York trading. Pfizer stock was little changed.

The results don’t mean that getting a bivalent shot has no benefit, and it will need to be confirmed in much larger studies. However, they raise the question of whether the switch to a new version of the vaccine was necessary.

The results also contrast sharply with an Oct. 13 press release from Pfizer and BioNTech touting “positive early data” from a clinical trial suggesting that its bivalent vaccine “is anticipated to provide better protection.” The statement was based on data collected from subjects in the first seven days after immunization, and the company has not yet released details.

“So far we don’t see the benefit” of the bivalent shots over the old ones, said study senior author David Ho, a virologist who heads the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center at Columbia University. A clear difference between the boosters could emerge over longer periods of time, he said in a telephone interview. It could also turn out that a second booster shot with the bivalent vaccine may be needed, he said.

Ho said that the study has been submitted for publication in a scientific journal.

Slow Rollout

Rollout of the bivalent vaccines has been slow so far. Only about 20 million Americans have received the latest version of the vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The lackluster results for bivalent boosters could be due to a phenomenon called imprinting, Ho said. That means that the immune system most strongly remembers the first version of a virus it encounters. After it mutates, the response to a vaccine -- even one targeting newer strains -- may still be tilted toward fighting the original pathogen.

Ho said he personally has gotten four doses of the original generation of mRNA shots, and that he is waiting for more data to roll in to decide what to do about a fifth dose.

Pfizer declined to comment on outside research. A spokesperson said the company would reveal additional 30-day data on its bivalent shot in the coming weeks. Moderna didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

In early October, Moderna researchers published data from the clinical trial of a different bivalent booster that is tailored to the original omicron strain. That study, in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that a fourth shot of that bivalent vaccine produced higher levels of antibodies compared to four shots of Moderna’s original vaccine. Moderna’s bivalent vaccine against the original omicron strain, called mRNA-1273.214, is not authorized in the U.S., but has been cleared for use in numerous countries including the UK and Canada.

Nonetheless, scientists have harbored doubts about the benefit of switching up the shots’ composition. Before the US began rolling out updated boosters in September, John Moore, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medical College said the new vaccines would be “little or no better” than earlier formulations.

https://www.inkl.com/newsletters/morning-edition/news/new-covid-boosters-aren-t-better-than-old-ones-study-finds

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

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

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

Posted by JR at 5:25 PM 0 comments

Tuesday, October 25, 2022



Another dubious study of Ivermectin

This study concluded that ivermectin was no help for outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. But like many previous studies, it appears to have ignored the time factor. Enrolment in the study appears to have been very relaxed, with no attention paid to how long the patient had had Covid symptoms. Since Ivermectim is one of the drugs that normally need to be taken very soon after symptoms become evident, this study tells us effectively nothing -- JR

Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19

Susanna Naggie et al

Abstract

Importance: The effectiveness of ivermectin to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients in the US with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 is unknown.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin, 400 ÎĽg/kg, daily for 3 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19.

Design, Setting, and Participants: ACTIV-6, an ongoing, decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial, was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1591 participants aged 30 years and older with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing 2 or more symptoms of acute infection for 7 days or less, were enrolled from June 23, 2021, through February 4, 2022, with follow-up data through May 31, 2022, at 93 sites in the US.

Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive ivermectin, 400 ÎĽg/kg (n = 817), daily for 3 days or placebo (n = 774).

Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. There were 7 secondary outcomes, including a composite of hospitalization or death by day 28.

Results: Among 1800 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 48 [12] years; 932 women [58.6%]; 753 [47.3%] reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1591 completed the trial. The hazard ratio (HR) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.07 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.96-1.17; posterior P value [HR >1] = .91). The median time to recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-13) in the ivermectin group and 13 days (IQR, 12-14) in the placebo group. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and 9 in the placebo group (1.2% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.1 [95% CrI, 0.4-2.6]). The most common serious adverse events were COVID-19 pneumonia (ivermectin [n = 5]; placebo [n = 7]) and venous thromboembolism (ivermectin [n = 1]; placebo [n = 5]).

Conclusions and Relevance" Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483 ?

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

Children's Health Defense Demands Lawmakers Stop COVID Vaccine Mandates

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory committee on Thursday voted that the agency should update its recommended immunization schedules to add the COVID-19 vaccine, including to the schedule for children.

Committee members said the vote doesn’t affect what vaccines are required for school attendance, the CDC is merely codifying its pre-existing recommendation. School mandate decisions are made at the state, county and municipal levels, the committee said. “This discussion doesn’t change that,” a committee member said.

But as Dr. Robert Malone pointed out, pediatricians and state public health officials use the CDC schedule.

Writing on Substack, Malone said:

“State public health systems use the schedule to determine which vaccines to require for children to enter schools. Yes, some states have more stringent requirements than others. Some states allow for ‘opt-outs,’ but in the end, most states follow the CDC guidelines. The ACIP functionally establishes ‘standard of care’ in this area.”

Commenting on the vote, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of the board and chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), said:

“This reckless action is final proof of the cynicism, corruption and capture of a once exemplary public health agency. ACIP members have again demonstrated that fealty to their pharma overlords eclipses any residual concerns they may harbor for child welfare or public health.”

This is an act of child abuse on a massive scale.

The regulatory agencies and their advisory committees have gone amok. It’s time for people to stop consenting and stop complying. To tell your state’s leaders “No COVID vaccine mandates for our state’s kids” click the link.

Despite immense blowback, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted unanimously to add COVID-19 injections to its recommended schedule of vaccinations for infants, children and adolescents. The committee members’ votes solidify their steadfast loyalty to protecting pharma profits at the cost of children’s lives. This is the first step to granting permanent, blanket liability protection for all current and future COVID-19 injections.

This is a declaration of war on our children. The responsibility to be unrelenting as we defend the next generation from Big Pharma now falls on us. In the coming months, nearly every state in the nation will universally adopt the CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule.

Fortunately, the CDC doesn’t have the authority to set school immunization requirements, and the vote doesn’t mandate the vaccine for schoolchildren. That’s a decision left to the states.

https://www.conservativehq.org/post/add-your-voice-children-s-health-defense-demands-lawmakers-stop-covid-vaccine-mandates

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

Persian Pilot Study: Atorvastatin Efficacious in Mild to Moderate Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

Recently, investigators looked at the broadly used cholesterol-reducing generic atorvastatin (Lipitor®). Atorvastatin is a lipid-lowering drug included in the statin class of medications. By inhibiting the endogenous production of cholesterol in the liver, statins lower abnormal cholesterol and lipid levels and ultimately, reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Statins have been theorized to be potentially helpful against Covid-19 for quite a while now, as highlighted in this published mechanistic paper from April 2020. They have multiple mechanisms that might provide benefits, such as pleiotropic effects on inflammation and oxidative stress, which contribute to their beneficial impact on cardiovascular diseases. They modulate the immune response, restore the vascular redox balance by reducing reactive oxygen species and increasing antioxidants, and ameliorate nitric oxide bioavailability, endothelial function, and integrity.

The Persian research team was aware of the many clinical benefits of statins, along with their excellent safety profile, low cost, and their broad availability. As a result, they conducted a triple-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial evaluating atorvastatin in mild to moderate hospitalized Covid-19 patients. There were 52 patients who were randomized 1:1 into the treatment group to receive 40mg atorvastatin once daily for 14 days or the placebo group. They tracked patients' symptoms and laboratory markers at baseline and during the follow-up period. They also evaluated the duration of hospitalization and supplemental O2 therapy. The results were reported in Pubmed and Eureka Select.

Results

After a 14-day of follow-up, the oxygen saturation (SaO2) was significantly higher, and the serum high-sensitivity C-reactive protein.

The (hs-CRP) level was lower in the treatment group compared to the placebo group. Moreover, at the end of the follow-up in the treatment group, the lymphocyte count was higher, and the duration of symptom resolution was shorter but not significant. Also, in the treatment group, the length of supplemental oxygen therapy and hospitalization duration were meaningfully shorter. The investigators shared the study results reveal that the mortality rate was almost twice higher in the placebo group compared to the treatment group, without any significant adverse drug reaction.

Conclusion

Atorvastatin significantly reduces supplemental oxygen need, hospitalization duration, and serum hs-CRP level in mild to moderate hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

TrialSite contributor Paul Elkins tracked this study and reported on the potential cost of such a course of treatment of atorvastatin for a patient who doesn't have insurance. Checking GoodRX.com, the retail price at Walmart Pharmacy is $15 for a 30-day supply of 40mg. That would treat two Covid-19 patients on the dosing regimen tested in this trial or $7.50 per patient. Of course, TrialSite isn't making medical recommendations, and this was a small study that would need further validation. The point: If we are moving to the endemic stage of COVID-19, consumers in America need low-cost, repurposed regimens that can help lower the cost of care. The NIH and academic health systems should be seriously investigating low-cost repurposed therapeutic regimens.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/persian-pilot-study-atorvastatin-efficacious-in-mild-to-moderate-hospitalized-covid-19-patients-72de5d39

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

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

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

Posted by JR at 11:45 PM 0 comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)