Tuesday, October 17, 2023


Australian Medical Society Investigating Excess Deaths—Suspects the Population Faces a doctor-caused Crisis

The Australian Medical Professionals Society (AMPS) recently launched an inquiry into Australia’s excess mortality: Unveiling an overlooked crisis. Throughout the medical system, the political system and the media, the fact that there are too many Australian people dying is being ignored. And the group of providers seeks to change that. The group has commissioned studies and expressed concern that mass COVID-19 countermeasures have led to excess mortality.

Recently, the society was in touch with TrialSite, sharing updates on imminent activity and events involving the controversial, but important topic.

This Wednesday, October 18, in Parliament House, Canberra, the AMPS holds an inquiry, addressing the alarming rise in excess mortality in Australia since 2021. This timing is of deep concern given the mass vaccination scheme occurred right at this time.

This inquiry aims to uncover the most pressing question: What is causing Australians to die at unprecedented rates? Why has the death rate rocketed? In response to the Senate's extraordinary decision on 23 March 2023, against investigating this sudden excess mortality, a committed group of Australians, in collaboration with international colleagues, has undertaken the investigation that, unfortunately, Australian political and medical authorities thus far have refused to pursue.

Delving deeper into the regulatory failures hindering the proper analysis of preclinical data concerning experimental COVID-19 vaccines, the Australian Medical Society reports serious shortcomings, potential data discrepancies, and alarming signals of harm being overlooked.

It is hoped that this investigation will in fact shed light on the inadequacies within the Therapeutic Goods Administration's (TGA) pharmacovigilance systems. The TGA regulates drugs and vaccines in Australia.

The analysis conducted by AMPS indicates that Australia is facing an iatrogenic crisis – one that has resulted from policies based on insufficient evidence. A bombshell of an allegation, AMPS alleges that the COVID-19 mass countermeasure response is likely linked to the death signals.

Conclusions from AMPS are documented in a book due for release titled, Too Many Dead – An Inquiry into Australia’s Excess Mortality. In collaboration with peers around the world, the group calls for an immediate suspension of the vaccination rollout, pending a full and transparent investigation.

Invitations have been issued to hundreds of politicians especially ministers; and to health authorities, medical colleges and associations Australia-wide including all members of ATAGI, the TGA, and academics in the health fields.

As a society committed to the well-being of all Australians, AMPS shares its commitment to ensuring accountability, transparency and justice, even when the facts may be unpalatable.

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

Yale Medicine Refers to the ‘Tripledemic’ That Never Was

Major academic medical institutions such as Yale Medicine go on record that the United States already experienced a “Tripledemic.” That’s the implication of a headliner accompanying the recent piece by Kathy Katella writing for Yale Medicine, implying that the presence of influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and COVID-19 over the past few years led to such an event.

Well, another fact check is in order: one covering one of the most elite of medical institutions. Yes, there was a COVID-19 pandemic, but never a “tripledemic.” But it’s true that all three viral infections can raise the risk of morbidity and mortality in vulnerable individuals, typically the elderly and individuals with comorbidities but also in some cases children.

Katella, a senior clinical writer for Yale Medicine, follows her hyperbolic headline with a report that this year, for the first time vaccines are available that help to “prevent these diseases, including an updated COVID vaccine, as well as vaccines and a monoclonal antibody injection for those most vulnerable to RSV.”

The Yale article borders on misinformation right at the onset with the title: “Can RSV and COVID Vaccines Prevent Another Tripledemic?”

First, it should be noted that there was never a tripledemic over the past “several” years as Katella states. So why refer to “another tripledemic” unless the author purposely seeks attention for this headline? Disingenuous, we expect a lot more from a prestigious place like Yale.

Does the piece fall under the category of misinformation or disinformation? Very possibly. Importantly, the distinction is that the former is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts wrong, while the latter represents false information which is deliberately intended to mislead—intentionally misstating the facts. Based on these definitions including a clearly inaccurate headline likely means the whole piece falls in the latter category, unfortunately.

The writer turns to be honest when addressing actually how helpful would the three vaccines be for individuals this winter, especially vulnerable persons to these viruses, stating it “is still difficult to say.”

But how to know how these vaccines can help? We cannot know for sure, more honestly, thus academia’s penchant for models. The Yale writer refers to the positive prospects of the use of “predictive models” citing a quote from infectious disease specialist Shana Gleeson, M.D.. Honesty again prevails, as the Yale doc states, “But we can’t say for sure how it’s all going to play out.”

Have any formal clinical trials testing approved COVID-19, influenza and RSV vaccines ever been undertaken and completed? Not at all, but you won’t get that information from Yale. What about the fact that Moderna is currently testing its mRNA vaccine with influenza vaccine for safety? Not a peep. But at TrialSite, you can learn more about these unfolding activities. See TrialSite in “Is it Safe to Receive both Moderna mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Influenza Vaccine—Clinical Trial Designed to Find Out.” Why Yale doesn’t take the time for basic research 101 we cannot say, other than it’s following some top-down approach to research and health communications.

Meanwhile, the influenza jab vaccine effectiveness was an abysmal 16% effective in the 2021-22 season. This is NOT to discourage those in high-risk cohorts from getting that vaccine. But for a healthy young person, we should ensure to understand a rational risk-benefit analysis and understand with such low effectiveness many of the vaccinated will still pass on the virus. So like COVID-19, the only reason to get vaccinated at this point is if one falls at risk for more severe flu, or for that matter, if one’s preference is to bolster their protective probabilities, even if it’s more psychological than scientific, for some.

The public health tools definitely help, but they are not the panacea promoted by the government, academic medicine and industry. And there are externalities involved, especially for the COVID-19 mRNA products. During emergency times the math of acceptance was more liberal, than today.

COVID-19 vaccines in the age of Omicron involve many breakthrough infections, meaning vaccinated persons can and do carry and spread the disease. With the COVID-19 vaccines, TrialSite started reporting on this scientific understanding by spring of 2021.

Yet Dr. Gleeson assumes all three of these vaccines are essentially sterilizing, in that they will stop viral transmission in all three viruses. She exhibits this bias upon addressing factors as to their effectiveness and impact. Dr. Gleeson states that one potential factor is how many people get the new shots. She implies the more people that get the shots, the more people will avoid infection, and consequently not spread the disease to others.

But given we don’t know the true effectiveness rates yet, and that these are not necessarily sterilizing vaccines, how can she be certain the volume of shots will make a difference at all? The truth is that she cannot. True, she can look back at epidemiological data and find some correlations, but this does not mean causation.

Other factors according to Gleeson such as masking, and the assumption that fewer people will take their masks off in the forthcoming season, along with crowding and get-togethers in enclosed places (think Holiday Season) all spell potential trouble for the “tripledemic.”

More here:

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

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

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

Monday, October 16, 2023



UK: Vaccine injury scheme ramps up staff as claims over Covid jabs keep growing

Increasing demand for Covid vaccine injury payments has seen the number of staff processing claims increase 20-fold, figures show.

The Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS) has scaled up operations and boosted its administrative staff from four to 80 to handle the claims.

A project is also under way to digitalise the application process to make it simpler and quicker for claimants.

But MPs, campaigners and families have called for the process to be reformed, arguing that the payment cap of £120,000 is too low, too slow and bureaucratic, and the eligibility criteria is too strict.

If a person is left severely disabled as a result of receiving certain vaccines they could be entitled to the one-off payment from the Government.

Families can also apply for the payment if a loved one died as a result of a vaccination.

It is not treated as compensation, meaning claimants can still seek damages in court.

“Inadequate funds to families’

A group of patients and families are now taking legal action against AstraZeneca after they suffered injury or bereavement as a result of complications from the Covid vaccine.

The Hausfeld Claimant group, which includes 13 bereaved families and 28 survivors, says the VDPS offers “inadequate funds to families”.

Sarah Moore, leading the litigation, said: “No amount of compensation will bring back loved ones or restore those injured to health but it can make life a little bit easier for the mothers, fathers, children, parents and partners who are now reshaping their lives.”

Figures released under a Freedom of Information (FOI) request in March show more than 4,000 claims related to a Covid-19 vaccine have been submitted since Nov 1 2021.

The payment scheme was taken over by the NHS Business Services Authority in November 2021, after previously being handled by the Department for Work and Pensions.

Of the 4,017 claims made, 334 relate to a claimant who has died.

Some 48 claims have been approved so far, Maria Caulfield, a health minister, told MPs in February.

A separate FOI document published in February revealed 3,842 claims had been received, meaning the number submitted has increased by almost 200 in one month alone. Of those, 814 claims were unsuccessful and a further 37 did not meet the eligibility criteria.

Under the VDPS, severe disablement means a patient must be at least 60 per cent disabled to qualify, based on the Social Security (General Benefit) Regulations 1982.

‘Balance of probabilities’

A patient’s medical records along with “all scientific evidence” will be considered in the application by an independent medical assessor.

They will decide if the person is due a payment based on whether “on the balance of probabilities” the vaccine caused the disability, and if the level of disability is 60 per cent.

Many claimants have been diagnosed with vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis, a rare condition linked to the Covid-19 jab.

The number of people who experienced life-changing adverse reactions to coronavirus vaccines is tiny compared to the millions who received the jab.

Data from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, up to Nov 23 2022, show 445 cases of major thromboembolic events (blood clots) with concurrent thrombocytopenia (low platelet counts) in the UK following an AstraZeneca jab. The overall case fatality rate was 18 per cent with 81 deaths.

The Government says it can take “at least six months” to process a VDPS claim, but a claim about a Covid-19 vaccine “will take longer”.

Jeremy Wright, Conservative MP for Kenilworth and Southam, raised the issue in the Commons this week and called on the Prime Minister to revamp the scheme.

He told The Telegraph: “It's good news if they're improving the resources to handle claims. There are a lot of claims and it's taking a very long time to process them.”

He added there were still “structural problems” with the scheme, including the low cap and 60 per cent disablement cut off.

Rishi Sunak said on Wednesday: “We are taking steps to reform vaccine damage payments schemes by modernising the operations and providing more timely outcomes, but of course I'd be happy to talk to the honourable gentleman further about it.”

The Telegraph has spoken to families who have waited more than a year for the payment.

Sheila Ward, whose husband Stephen, 57, died after having the Covid vaccine, said the compensation scheme was “not fit for purpose”.

Her husband, who was retired, had the Oxford AZ jab in March 2021. Mr Ward had no pre-existing conditions but after a few days developed a headache and had to stay in bed.

“We just thought he had been doing too much,” said Mrs Ward, 55, who lives in Newcastle.

When she went upstairs to check on him she found him unable to speak. He was taken to hospital where he was treated for a stroke. The doctors found bleeds and clots on his brain.

Compensation took a year

Later Mrs Ward was told by doctors that her husband had suffered seizures. He died before he could receive an operation.

A coroner’s certificate listed the vaccine as one of the causes of death but obtaining compensation took a year.

“The whole process was very slow and they never gave me updates unless I chased them,” said Mrs Ward, whose claim was finalised in June 2022.

“Personally, I don't think the compensation families receive is enough. I'm in a fortunate position that my husband had a pension, so my income has been subsidised that way.

“For anyone who has been left with a lifelong disability or young children, it simply wouldn’t be enough to replace somebody's income.”

Mrs Ward said the Government should consider raising the cap but also make the process faster. “It is not fit for purpose,” she said. “I’ve heard of cases where it takes 20 months for a decision. That is far too long”.

Vikki Spit, 40, lost her partner Zion of 21 years in May 2021 after he suffered a blood clot linked to the AZ vaccine. It took more than a year for Ms Spit, who campaigns for Vaccine Injured Bereaved UK, to receive the VDPS.

“The [60 per cent disabled] criteria is a really big [issue], because there are so many people just left with nothing after being severely injured, and have life-changing disabilities, and they’re just told ‘well you’re not interested enough’,” she said.

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

Immune Tolerance and the COVID-19 Vaccines

Turbo-cancers, which are very aggressive cancers characterized by 1) rapid progression and 2) diagnosis at a late stage, have been increasing significantly in the last couple of years. One of the major factors that may be contributing to this increase is the COVID-19 vaccine, especially those vaccines operating on the mRNA platform. In particular, one of the major mechanisms associated with the modus operandi of these mRNA vaccines is the class-switch from IgG3 to IgG4, and the subsequent reversal in the phenomenon known as Immune Tolerance.

Immune Tolerance can be defined as 1) “the process by which immune cells are made unresponsive to self-antigens to prevent damage to healthy tissues. It prevents an immune response to antigens produced by the body itself or recognized from a prior encounter.”, or 2) “the state of an active, highly regulated unresponsiveness of the immune system to self-antigens or against a particular antigen that can induce an immune response in the body.”, or 3) “prevention of an immune response against a particular antigen. For instance, the immune system is generally tolerant of self-antigens, so it does not usually attack the body's own cells, tissues, and organs. However, when tolerance is reduced substantially, disorders like autoimmune disease or food allergy may occur.” Immune tolerance is analogous to a military operation defending one’s homeland against invasion from without and within, where it is desired to do maximum damage to the invaders and minimum damage to the homeland and its residents (also see the following references for more comprehensive analyses of Immune Tolerance (link#1; link#2; link#3; link#4; link#5; link#6).

Immune Tolerance is important for analyzing biological mechanisms, and for examining the onset and progression of many diseases. A more comprehensive view of Immune Tolerance would be useful for understanding its mechanisms and impacts. This Op-ed provides an overview of Immune Tolerance, based on the contents of the premier biomedical literature (Medline). The main output of this study is a hierarchical taxonomy of the Immune Tolerance biomedical literature, where the taxonomy is generated using a text-clustering approach. This Op-ed will show how the immune system uses Immune Tolerance to destroy foreign invaders or endogenous dysfunctional processes like rapid cancer cell multiplication without destroying the host in the process, or, conversely, how the immune system allows mild foreign invaders, such as allergens, to co-exist within the host with minimal damage to the host. It will also show how factors that adversely impact the immune system can distort the function of Immune Tolerance, and allow foreign invaders or endogenous dysfunctional processes to exert massive damage on the host.

METHODOLOGY

A query was developed to retrieve articles from Pubmed that focused on Immune Tolerance, and was entered into the Pubmed search engine on 25 September 2023. It retrieved 23,049 articles (with Abstracts only) for the period 1 January 1993-31 December 2023. The records retrieved were imported into the CLUTO text-clustering software, 64 leaf clusters were selected, and a hierarchical taxonomy was generated by the algorithm. Each leaf cluster was analyzed by visual inspection, and aggregate categories consisting of related leaf clusters were constructed.

The Immune Tolerance phenomena related to COVID-19 vaccine effects were identified from the records retrieved by the Pubmed query (as well as records related to the records retrieved by the query). and discussed.

The Pubmed query used is: "Immune Tolerance" [Majr] OR "immune tolerance" [tiab] OR “immune system tolerance" [tiab] OR “immunological tolerance" [tiab], where Majr is major MeSH theme and tiab is title and abstract.....

Some of the more egregious contributors to immune system dysfunction and, in some sense, promoters of unwanted Immune Tolerance to both micro-organisms and cancer cells are the present bioweapon injections masquerading as COVID-19 vaccines. The immune system consequences of these injections are highlighted here because of the large number of people who received them. Our studies have shown that the fundamental modus operandi of these injections is destruction of the immune system, where the level of immune system destruction increases with each injection. This immune system destruction can potentially lead to i) increased numbers of, and more aggressive, cancers, ii) reactivation of dormant viruses, and iii) increases in autoimmune diseases. The Immune Tolerance that accompanies this immune system destruction plays a strong role in each of the three adverse effects mentioned above.

Specific mechanisms of both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the COVID-19 (mainly) mRNA vaccines that could induce unwanted Immune Tolerance were presented in the text, but only those arising from the COVID-19 vaccines will be presented here. They include: Class switching to increased IgG4; Incorporation of pseudouridine into mRNA; Multiple mRNA injections; Degradation and suppression of the immune system potentially leading to cancer (Suppression of Toll-Like Receptors, Impact on Tumor Suppressor Protein p53 and Genomic Transposable Element LINE-1, Spike Protein Interference with DNA Repair Mechanisms, Vaccines contaminated with Plasmid DNA containing SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, Simian virus 40 (SV40) in DNA discovered in Pfizer mRNA vaccine vials, Enhanced expression of PD-L1, Induction of pseudo-autoimmunity (more focused on autoimmunity rather than cancer)). Additionally, excerpts from critical papers show some of the synergies among these mechanisms acting in concert.

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

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

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

15 October, 2023

New York State Supreme Court Issues Final Blow to Vaccine Mandate for Healthcare Workers

The pandemic is over. The Biden administration was forced to end the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration in May. Most people threw out their masks, embraced large indoor gatherings once again, and stores finally ditched those obnoxious and ineffective Plexiglass dividers. But even in this post-pandemic era, there are still legal battles playing out across the country over vaccine mandates.

In January, New York's Supreme Court struck down the state's vaccine mandate for healthcare workers but, of course, the Empire State didn't want to let go without a fight.

Last week, however, the Supreme Court Appellate Division, Fourth Department, dismissed the state's appeal.

"The mandate is over and declared unconstitutional," Sujata Gibson, attorney for the plaintiffs, said on X.

"This was an important victory. While it does not make healthcare workers whole, it does protect us from future overreach by the executive branch," she noted, according to Children's Health Defense.

The state Supreme Court on Jan. 13 declared New York’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers “null, void, and of no effect,” and ruled that the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) lacked the authority to impose the mandate.

The ruling pertained to a lawsuit filed on Oct. 20, 2022, against the NYSDOH, Gov. Kathleen C. Hochul and health commissioner Mary T. Bassett, by Medical Professionals for Informed Consent — a group of medical practitioners impacted by the mandate — and additional plaintiffs, including two doctors, a nurse, a radiologic technologist and a medical laboratory specialist. Children’s Health Defense (CHD) funded the lawsuit.

On Jan. 24, the state appealed the Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned the mandate. However, before the appeals court ruled, Jonathan Hitsous, attorney for the New York State Attorney General’s office, announced unexpectedly during a May hearing that the state planned to rescind the mandate.

Hitsous argued that the repeal would render the original lawsuit “moot” — meaning the rights and interests of the parties involved would no longer be at stake — and he requested that the lower court’s Jan. 13 decision striking down the mandate be vacated.

CHD and Gibson opposed the move in a joint statement, arguing that vacating the lower court’s decision would “leave open the very real possibility that this constitutional violation could happen again and ruin many more lives.”

“The law does not allow an agency to voluntarily stop an illegal activity and then claim they shouldn’t be held legally accountable,” Gibson told CHD.TV at the time.

Since then, New York formally repealed the mandate through the administrative process. In its ruling issued last week, the court held that the repeal “moots” the state’s appeal, but it declined to vacate the lower court’s decision or to take any position on it.

The vaccine mandate for healthcare workers went into effect in September 2021, which led to about 34,000 medical professionals to quit or be terminated.

Margaret Florini, a spokesperson for Medical Professionals for Informed Consent, told The Defender, "This is just the beginning."

"I think we will see many new lawsuits come about because of this historic win," Florini said. "There is still plenty of work to be done. We lost so much, not just money but relationships, marriages, friends, and homes. We cannot forget what was done to us and we must continue to shed light on it and make impactful changes that will truly prevent this from happening again."

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

Beware the COVID Cranks

Dr. Anthony Fauci is back in the news as the media hype a resurgence of COVID-19 cases. Asked earlier last month by CNN’s Michael Smerconish if people should begin wearing masks again, he said, "I hope they would abide by the recommendation and take into account the risks to themselves and to their families. We are not talking about forcing anybody to do anything." Fauci, of course, backed a national mask mandate in 2020.

But that’s the least of the COVID contradictions from Fauci and others. Put aside the obfuscations of the origin of the virus (smearing proponents of the Wuhan “lab-leak” as conspiracy theorists.) Our public health bureaucracy has made so many misleading and confusing pronouncements, and FGI has uncovered such inconvenient facts through FOIA requests, that the public should take any new dictates with a truckload of salt.

Prior to COVID, the only randomized control trial (RCT) of cloth mask efficacy was performed in the context of SARS virus. Considered to be the “gold standard” for drawing scientific conclusions, the RCT study found that cloth mask “filtration was extremely poor (almost 0%).” So, when COVID hit, the information with the highest integrity indicated cloth masks were virtually useless as a filter for airborne SARS virus. Perhaps Fauci was thinking of this study when he initially said there was no need for masks.

By October 2020, Fauci was a mask-believer, and working on a paper for the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that praised mask efficacy when The Federalist published an article that cited the findings of a CDC study completed the month before. Masks and face coverings, the CDC concluded, were ineffective in preventing the spread of COVID-19.

The records obtained by FGI showed that Fauci was aware of both the article and the CDC study while working on his JAMA paper, as a co-author sent them to him the day the article was published. Fauci’s response: “Not good for our paper.”

In another email she stated, “I would not tell people that the cloth masks we are all wearing provide PERSONAL PROTECTION against acquisition of the virus-they may to some degree, but I have never seen convincing data on this.”

Shortly thereafter, Fauci’s JAMA paper was published without reference to the inconvenient studies, instead relying on an already discredited mask study. When another scientist pointed out the blunder, Fauci told his assistant to make a note of it but not to take any action to correct it.

It wasn’t just Fauci. Early in the pandemic, the CDC and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) created the COVID-19 Real-Time Learning Network website purporting to share “accurate, timely information about COVID-19.” In November 2021, Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, penned an official letter with several colleagues to the medical editor of the website, pointing out that both the site and the CDC’s guidance on masks currently contained incorrect, harmful advice for the American public.

Osterholm warned that the flawed information would “not only damage the credibility of science and endanger public trust by misrepresenting the evidence, but also provide false expectations in terms of respiratory protection to the public.” Officials should “reconsider [their] statements about the efficacy of masks and face coverings for preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2.” Osterholm identified a pattern of cherry-picking studies based on their alignment with the administration’s policy agenda, saying, “Studies that do not support its perspective are similarly downplayed.”

Osterholm was ignored and CDC doubled down on claims that “any mask is better than no mask.”

Unfortunately, the dysfunction doesn’t end with masks. In November 2022, Vice President Kamala Harris tweeted, “One shot, once a year—that’s all most people will need to stay protected from COVID year-long.” The next day, HHS Secretary Becerra tweeted, “An updated COVID vaccine can help protect you from the worst outcomes of COVID. If it’s been over 2 months since your last dose, make a plan to get one now.” Becerra repeated his two-month recommendation the following day in another tweet.

Upon seeing the tweets, FGI made a FOIA request for documentation of the scientific reasoning supporting Becerra’s prescription for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots every two months. By law, the government is given 20 business days to respond to a FOIA, yet it took eight months and a lawsuit for the HHS to confirm that there was no medical evidence for six shots per year nor were there any documents or communications explaining the origin of the Secretary’s public health pronouncement.

We can hope COVID-19 as a public health issue and the government dysfunction that came with it will continue to fade into memory. Our public health bureaucracy didn’t exactly cover itself in glory while it was trying to cover our faces – and its posterior.

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

Italian Study Claims Neanderthal Genes Are Linked to Long Covid

The cause of Long Covid has been the source of ongoing speculation. Studies have pointed to a dysfunction in the immune system and another points Covid-19 latching onto the ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) receptor, which acts as the doorway through which the virus infects cells. The depletion of ACE2 is central to the neuromuscular complications experienced by a significant percentage of Covid-19 patients. There may be at least 6 million people worldwide suffering from Long Covid and the prolonged disease also has advocacy groups. Now, a recent study out of Italy indicates the reason some people are infected with Long Covid is because of ancient genes.

Neanderthal Genes

A recent study from Milan, Italy and carried out in the Northern Italian city of Bergamo, suggests genes inherited from Neanderthals, extinct cousins of modern humans, could help explain why some people developed life-threatening forms of Long Covid while others didn’t. The Northern Italian city was hit very hard by the Covid pandemic, and Bergarmo suffered one of the highest death rates of the pandemic. The high number of infections provided scientists with data for the study, though the research doesn’t address why so many people died there compared with other parts of Italy or Europe.

The researchers were led by Giuseppe Remuzi. They found genes passed down from Neanderthals may confer higher risk from Covid-19. Remuzi is with the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research in Milan. This research was done on behalf of WHO’s ORIGIN study group.

The study was a genome wide associate study (GWAS). The researchers studied a sample of nearly 10,000 people in the Bergamo area, identified several genes associated with the development of severe respiratory illness. Three of those genes belonged to a group of variations in DNA, or haplotype, inherited from Neanderthals. The study found that people who carry the Neanderthal haplotype were twice as likely to develop severe pneumonia from a Covid infection than those who didn’t, and three times as likely to be hospitalized in intensive care units and put on ventilators.

What is not known is whether the haplotype is more common in the Bergamo region than in other Italian or European regions. Epidemiologists still don’t know why parts of northern Italy suffered such high death tolls, especially early in the pandemic. Scientists have suggested factors could have included age, air pollution and that the virus hit the region early in the pandemic and spread undetected.

Study Shows Risk for Some

“This study shows there is a particular section of the human genome that is significantly associated with the risk of getting Covid-19 and of developing a severe form of it,” says Remuzzi. “That section is more important than any others to explain why some fall seriously ill.” Remuzzi added in Bergamo 33% of those who developed life-threatening forms of Covid had the Neanderthal haplotype.

About 2% of the genomes of people of European or Asian ancestry is inherited from Neanderthals, and they have been linked to modern humans’ susceptibility to a variety of diseases. The study adds to a growing body of research which indicates that a cluster of Neanderthal genes increases the likelihood of developing severe forms of Covid-19. Bergamo was an early epicenter of the pandemic. As pointed out, a notable feature of Bergamo is that its population is relatively homogeneous. Perhaps this study provides the answer as to why Covid was so prevalent in the Northern Italian city.

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

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

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

Sunday, October 15, 2023


New York State Supreme Court Issues Final Blow to Vaccine Mandate for Healthcare Workers

The pandemic is over. The Biden administration was forced to end the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration in May. Most people threw out their masks, embraced large indoor gatherings once again, and stores finally ditched those obnoxious and ineffective Plexiglass dividers. But even in this post-pandemic era, there are still legal battles playing out across the country over vaccine mandates.

In January, New York's Supreme Court struck down the state's vaccine mandate for healthcare workers but, of course, the Empire State didn't want to let go without a fight.

Last week, however, the Supreme Court Appellate Division, Fourth Department, dismissed the state's appeal.

"The mandate is over and declared unconstitutional," Sujata Gibson, attorney for the plaintiffs, said on X.

"This was an important victory. While it does not make healthcare workers whole, it does protect us from future overreach by the executive branch," she noted, according to Children's Health Defense.

The state Supreme Court on Jan. 13 declared New York’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers “null, void, and of no effect,” and ruled that the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) lacked the authority to impose the mandate.

The ruling pertained to a lawsuit filed on Oct. 20, 2022, against the NYSDOH, Gov. Kathleen C. Hochul and health commissioner Mary T. Bassett, by Medical Professionals for Informed Consent — a group of medical practitioners impacted by the mandate — and additional plaintiffs, including two doctors, a nurse, a radiologic technologist and a medical laboratory specialist. Children’s Health Defense (CHD) funded the lawsuit.

On Jan. 24, the state appealed the Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned the mandate. However, before the appeals court ruled, Jonathan Hitsous, attorney for the New York State Attorney General’s office, announced unexpectedly during a May hearing that the state planned to rescind the mandate.

Hitsous argued that the repeal would render the original lawsuit “moot” — meaning the rights and interests of the parties involved would no longer be at stake — and he requested that the lower court’s Jan. 13 decision striking down the mandate be vacated.

CHD and Gibson opposed the move in a joint statement, arguing that vacating the lower court’s decision would “leave open the very real possibility that this constitutional violation could happen again and ruin many more lives.”

“The law does not allow an agency to voluntarily stop an illegal activity and then claim they shouldn’t be held legally accountable,” Gibson told CHD.TV at the time.

Since then, New York formally repealed the mandate through the administrative process. In its ruling issued last week, the court held that the repeal “moots” the state’s appeal, but it declined to vacate the lower court’s decision or to take any position on it.

The vaccine mandate for healthcare workers went into effect in September 2021, which led to about 34,000 medical professionals to quit or be terminated.

Margaret Florini, a spokesperson for Medical Professionals for Informed Consent, told The Defender, "This is just the beginning."

"I think we will see many new lawsuits come about because of this historic win," Florini said. "There is still plenty of work to be done. We lost so much, not just money but relationships, marriages, friends, and homes. We cannot forget what was done to us and we must continue to shed light on it and make impactful changes that will truly prevent this from happening again."

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

Beware the COVID Cranks

Dr. Anthony Fauci is back in the news as the media hype a resurgence of COVID-19 cases. Asked earlier last month by CNN’s Michael Smerconish if people should begin wearing masks again, he said, "I hope they would abide by the recommendation and take into account the risks to themselves and to their families. We are not talking about forcing anybody to do anything." Fauci, of course, backed a national mask mandate in 2020.

But that’s the least of the COVID contradictions from Fauci and others. Put aside the obfuscations of the origin of the virus (smearing proponents of the Wuhan “lab-leak” as conspiracy theorists.) Our public health bureaucracy has made so many misleading and confusing pronouncements, and FGI has uncovered such inconvenient facts through FOIA requests, that the public should take any new dictates with a truckload of salt.

Prior to COVID, the only randomized control trial (RCT) of cloth mask efficacy was performed in the context of SARS virus. Considered to be the “gold standard” for drawing scientific conclusions, the RCT study found that cloth mask “filtration was extremely poor (almost 0%).” So, when COVID hit, the information with the highest integrity indicated cloth masks were virtually useless as a filter for airborne SARS virus. Perhaps Fauci was thinking of this study when he initially said there was no need for masks.

By October 2020, Fauci was a mask-believer, and working on a paper for the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that praised mask efficacy when The Federalist published an article that cited the findings of a CDC study completed the month before. Masks and face coverings, the CDC concluded, were ineffective in preventing the spread of COVID-19.

The records obtained by FGI showed that Fauci was aware of both the article and the CDC study while working on his JAMA paper, as a co-author sent them to him the day the article was published. Fauci’s response: “Not good for our paper.”

In another email she stated, “I would not tell people that the cloth masks we are all wearing provide PERSONAL PROTECTION against acquisition of the virus-they may to some degree, but I have never seen convincing data on this.”

Shortly thereafter, Fauci’s JAMA paper was published without reference to the inconvenient studies, instead relying on an already discredited mask study. When another scientist pointed out the blunder, Fauci told his assistant to make a note of it but not to take any action to correct it.

It wasn’t just Fauci. Early in the pandemic, the CDC and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) created the COVID-19 Real-Time Learning Network website purporting to share “accurate, timely information about COVID-19.” In November 2021, Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, penned an official letter with several colleagues to the medical editor of the website, pointing out that both the site and the CDC’s guidance on masks currently contained incorrect, harmful advice for the American public.

Osterholm warned that the flawed information would “not only damage the credibility of science and endanger public trust by misrepresenting the evidence, but also provide false expectations in terms of respiratory protection to the public.” Officials should “reconsider [their] statements about the efficacy of masks and face coverings for preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2.” Osterholm identified a pattern of cherry-picking studies based on their alignment with the administration’s policy agenda, saying, “Studies that do not support its perspective are similarly downplayed.”

Osterholm was ignored and CDC doubled down on claims that “any mask is better than no mask.”

Unfortunately, the dysfunction doesn’t end with masks. In November 2022, Vice President Kamala Harris tweeted, “One shot, once a year—that’s all most people will need to stay protected from COVID year-long.” The next day, HHS Secretary Becerra tweeted, “An updated COVID vaccine can help protect you from the worst outcomes of COVID. If it’s been over 2 months since your last dose, make a plan to get one now.” Becerra repeated his two-month recommendation the following day in another tweet.

Upon seeing the tweets, FGI made a FOIA request for documentation of the scientific reasoning supporting Becerra’s prescription for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots every two months. By law, the government is given 20 business days to respond to a FOIA, yet it took eight months and a lawsuit for the HHS to confirm that there was no medical evidence for six shots per year nor were there any documents or communications explaining the origin of the Secretary’s public health pronouncement.

We can hope COVID-19 as a public health issue and the government dysfunction that came with it will continue to fade into memory. Our public health bureaucracy didn’t exactly cover itself in glory while it was trying to cover our faces – and its posterior.

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

Italian Study Claims Neanderthal Genes Are Linked to Long Covid

The cause of Long Covid has been the source of ongoing speculation. Studies have pointed to a dysfunction in the immune system and another points Covid-19 latching onto the ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) receptor, which acts as the doorway through which the virus infects cells. The depletion of ACE2 is central to the neuromuscular complications experienced by a significant percentage of Covid-19 patients. There may be at least 6 million people worldwide suffering from Long Covid and the prolonged disease also has advocacy groups. Now, a recent study out of Italy indicates the reason some people are infected with Long Covid is because of ancient genes.

Neanderthal Genes

A recent study from Milan, Italy and carried out in the Northern Italian city of Bergamo, suggests genes inherited from Neanderthals, extinct cousins of modern humans, could help explain why some people developed life-threatening forms of Long Covid while others didn’t. The Northern Italian city was hit very hard by the Covid pandemic, and Bergarmo suffered one of the highest death rates of the pandemic. The high number of infections provided scientists with data for the study, though the research doesn’t address why so many people died there compared with other parts of Italy or Europe.

The researchers were led by Giuseppe Remuzi. They found genes passed down from Neanderthals may confer higher risk from Covid-19. Remuzi is with the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research in Milan. This research was done on behalf of WHO’s ORIGIN study group.

The study was a genome wide associate study (GWAS). The researchers studied a sample of nearly 10,000 people in the Bergamo area, identified several genes associated with the development of severe respiratory illness. Three of those genes belonged to a group of variations in DNA, or haplotype, inherited from Neanderthals. The study found that people who carry the Neanderthal haplotype were twice as likely to develop severe pneumonia from a Covid infection than those who didn’t, and three times as likely to be hospitalized in intensive care units and put on ventilators.

What is not known is whether the haplotype is more common in the Bergamo region than in other Italian or European regions. Epidemiologists still don’t know why parts of northern Italy suffered such high death tolls, especially early in the pandemic. Scientists have suggested factors could have included age, air pollution and that the virus hit the region early in the pandemic and spread undetected.

Study Shows Risk for Some

“This study shows there is a particular section of the human genome that is significantly associated with the risk of getting Covid-19 and of developing a severe form of it,” says Remuzzi. “That section is more important than any others to explain why some fall seriously ill.” Remuzzi added in Bergamo 33% of those who developed life-threatening forms of Covid had the Neanderthal haplotype.

About 2% of the genomes of people of European or Asian ancestry is inherited from Neanderthals, and they have been linked to modern humans’ susceptibility to a variety of diseases. The study adds to a growing body of research which indicates that a cluster of Neanderthal genes increases the likelihood of developing severe forms of Covid-19. Bergamo was an early epicenter of the pandemic. As pointed out, a notable feature of Bergamo is that its population is relatively homogeneous. Perhaps this study provides the answer as to why Covid was so prevalent in the Northern Italian city.

13 October, 2023

CDC Data Reveals Status of COVID-19 Hospitalizations Across US

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted updated data showing that COVID-19 hospital admissions are continuing to decline across the United States after it showed an uptick in cases over the summer.

As of the week ending Sept. 30, hospitalizations are down by 6 percent, emergency department visits are down by 14.5 percent, and cases are down by 1.2 percent, according to the CDC. Deaths are up by 3.8 percent, but health officials have long said that deaths usually lag behind hospitalizations and case numbers.

For several weeks now, hospital admissions have been declining on a weekly basis. In July, COVID-19 hospitalizations, however, had been on the rise—although CDC historical data suggest that they were relatively low compared with previous years.

The EG.5 variant, which has been dubbed Eris, has accounted for about 24.5 percent of all COVID-19 cases, according to the federal health agency's variant tracker. FL.1.5.1, known as Fornax, is estimated to be responsible for about 13.7 percent of infections, the CDC figures show.

During the late summer and during a rise in hospitalizations, some health officials suggested that it doesn’t appear to be as bad as previous increases of the virus.

“Looking at that graph [of] hospitalizations, even though it’s on an upward trend, that’s still lower than it was last year at this time,” Dr. John Segreti, an epidemiologist and the medical director of infection control and prevention at Chicago's Rush University Medical Center, told ABC News at the time. “The fact that the numbers are going up fairly slowly, I think is a good sign.”

Dr. Shira Doron, chief infection control officer for Tufts Medicine, said that the recent “upswing is not a surge; it’s not even a wave.” The doctor added: “What we’re seeing is a very gradual and small upward trajectory of cases and hospitalizations, without deaths really going along, which is great news."

'Public Health Threat'

Despite the drop in hospitalizations over multiple consecutive weeks, the CDC issued a report on Oct. 6 saying that COVID-19 remains a "public health threat" for older Americans and called on people again to get the updated COVID-19 booster vaccine. Older adults, it said, make up the majority of hospitalizations across the United States in recent days, although that has been consistent with historical trends.

In mid-July, around seven out of every 100,000 people aged 65 and older were hospitalized with COVID-19, said the CDC. But by mid-August, according to the agency, 16.4 per 100,000 adults aged 65 and older were hospitalized with the viral infection.

Overall, from January to August 2023, adults aged 65 years and older "accounted for 62.9 percent of all COVID-19–associated hospitalizations," it said before suggesting that older people get the "recommended COVID-19 bivalent vaccine."

Other than getting the vaccine, they should also adopt "measures to reduce risk for contracting COVID-19" and receive "prompt outpatient antiviral treatment after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result," it added.

The second highest hospitalization rate was among individuals aged 50 to 64 at around one out of 100,000, it said.

Since the original COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out several years ago, uptake of the booster shots has consistently dropped. After the CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) signed off on the latest vaccines, data from the Department of Health and Human Services show that just 1 percent of all Americans opted to get the shot in September.

However, six medical journals rejected a key paper on COVID-19 vaccines and heart inflammation, a condition the vaccines cause, according to documents reviewed by The Epoch Times. The CDC's journal, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, was among those that rejected the paper, which estimated that COVID-19 hospitalizations would be prevented than cases of heart inflammation, or myocarditis, caused.

Another report from The Epoch Times, published Wednesday, revealed the FDA received results from two studies of subclinical heart inflammation following Moderna COVID-19 vaccination, but won't release them to the public—for now.

Some hospitals since August have started implementing mask mandates—at least for staff—claiming a rise in COVID-19 and other respiratory infections like RSV or influenza.

Notably, several Northern California counties issued a rule mandating masks be worn by all health care staff starting Nov. 1 and lasting until April 30, 2024. Contra Costa, Sonoma, Alameda, and San Mateo counties in September mandated masking regardless of vaccination status for hospitals and other care facilities, starting Nov. 1 and ending April 30, 2024.

California's San Luis Obispo County issued a similar mandate several days ago, requiring staffers to either wear a mask or get the vaccine.

Several hospitals in upstate New York, Massachusetts, and California also implemented a mandate in recent weeks, while at least one school in Maryland made masks mandatory for one kindergarten class. As for vaccine mandates, several dozen U.S. universities and colleges still have them intact, according to a recent report.

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

The VA Is Rejecting Disability Claims for COVID Vaccine Injuries and Senators Want to Know Why

After forcing U.S. service members to receive the COVID-19 vaccine or be released from the military, the Biden administration is refusing to provide disability status for soldiers injured by the jab. A number of Republican Senators are demanding to know why.

"We write for clarification on the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) policy for veterans who have injuries resulting from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine while in service. As you are aware, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) required all service members to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Many service members, despite hesitations against receiving the vaccine, chose to be vaccinated to continue their service to our country," Senators Marco Rubio, Mike Braun, Tom Cotton, Rick Scott, Ted Cruz, and Steve Daines wrote in a letter to Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough.

"Thousands of service members were discharged from service as a result of refusing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Yet, some U.S. service members received the vaccine to maintain their service and have since experienced lasting health impacts as a result," they continued. "If our government is asking service members to receive a vaccine, we must be cognizant that there will be unintended side effects that may cause lifelong impacts on their health. We must keep our promise to support our service members, including ensuring those who come to the VA for help with COVID-19 vaccine injuries are justly compensated and receive the care that they deserve."

The Senators also pointed out that the department has provided disability for injuries from vaccines for years but isn't doing so for the COVID-19 shot.

"For years, the VA has evaluated the health effects of certain vaccinations that veterans received during their service, and have expressed concern with certain health impacts arising from these vaccinations," they wrote. "The agency has also provided several resources to veterans seeking the COVID-19 vaccination, but no clear information about how to support members who are injured as a result of the vaccine. Given the high rate of service members who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 under DoD’s mandate, we request information as to how the VA is considering vaccine-related injuries in determining VA benefits and disability claims."

The Senators are seeking information from McDonough about how the department is handling claims.

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

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

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

Friday, October 13, 2023



CDC Data Reveals Status of COVID-19 Hospitalizations Across US

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted updated data showing that COVID-19 hospital admissions are continuing to decline across the United States after it showed an uptick in cases over the summer.

As of the week ending Sept. 30, hospitalizations are down by 6 percent, emergency department visits are down by 14.5 percent, and cases are down by 1.2 percent, according to the CDC. Deaths are up by 3.8 percent, but health officials have long said that deaths usually lag behind hospitalizations and case numbers.

For several weeks now, hospital admissions have been declining on a weekly basis. In July, COVID-19 hospitalizations, however, had been on the rise—although CDC historical data suggest that they were relatively low compared with previous years.

The EG.5 variant, which has been dubbed Eris, has accounted for about 24.5 percent of all COVID-19 cases, according to the federal health agency's variant tracker. FL.1.5.1, known as Fornax, is estimated to be responsible for about 13.7 percent of infections, the CDC figures show.

During the late summer and during a rise in hospitalizations, some health officials suggested that it doesn’t appear to be as bad as previous increases of the virus.

“Looking at that graph [of] hospitalizations, even though it’s on an upward trend, that’s still lower than it was last year at this time,” Dr. John Segreti, an epidemiologist and the medical director of infection control and prevention at Chicago's Rush University Medical Center, told ABC News at the time. “The fact that the numbers are going up fairly slowly, I think is a good sign.”

Dr. Shira Doron, chief infection control officer for Tufts Medicine, said that the recent “upswing is not a surge; it’s not even a wave.” The doctor added: “What we’re seeing is a very gradual and small upward trajectory of cases and hospitalizations, without deaths really going along, which is great news."

'Public Health Threat'

Despite the drop in hospitalizations over multiple consecutive weeks, the CDC issued a report on Oct. 6 saying that COVID-19 remains a "public health threat" for older Americans and called on people again to get the updated COVID-19 booster vaccine. Older adults, it said, make up the majority of hospitalizations across the United States in recent days, although that has been consistent with historical trends.

In mid-July, around seven out of every 100,000 people aged 65 and older were hospitalized with COVID-19, said the CDC. But by mid-August, according to the agency, 16.4 per 100,000 adults aged 65 and older were hospitalized with the viral infection.

Overall, from January to August 2023, adults aged 65 years and older "accounted for 62.9 percent of all COVID-19–associated hospitalizations," it said before suggesting that older people get the "recommended COVID-19 bivalent vaccine."

Other than getting the vaccine, they should also adopt "measures to reduce risk for contracting COVID-19" and receive "prompt outpatient antiviral treatment after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result," it added.

The second highest hospitalization rate was among individuals aged 50 to 64 at around one out of 100,000, it said.

Since the original COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out several years ago, uptake of the booster shots has consistently dropped. After the CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) signed off on the latest vaccines, data from the Department of Health and Human Services show that just 1 percent of all Americans opted to get the shot in September.

However, six medical journals rejected a key paper on COVID-19 vaccines and heart inflammation, a condition the vaccines cause, according to documents reviewed by The Epoch Times. The CDC's journal, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, was among those that rejected the paper, which estimated that COVID-19 hospitalizations would be prevented than cases of heart inflammation, or myocarditis, caused.

Another report from The Epoch Times, published Wednesday, revealed the FDA received results from two studies of subclinical heart inflammation following Moderna COVID-19 vaccination, but won't release them to the public—for now.

Some hospitals since August have started implementing mask mandates—at least for staff—claiming a rise in COVID-19 and other respiratory infections like RSV or influenza.

Notably, several Northern California counties issued a rule mandating masks be worn by all health care staff starting Nov. 1 and lasting until April 30, 2024. Contra Costa, Sonoma, Alameda, and San Mateo counties in September mandated masking regardless of vaccination status for hospitals and other care facilities, starting Nov. 1 and ending April 30, 2024.

California's San Luis Obispo County issued a similar mandate several days ago, requiring staffers to either wear a mask or get the vaccine.

Several hospitals in upstate New York, Massachusetts, and California also implemented a mandate in recent weeks, while at least one school in Maryland made masks mandatory for one kindergarten class. As for vaccine mandates, several dozen U.S. universities and colleges still have them intact, according to a recent report.

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

The VA Is Rejecting Disability Claims for COVID Vaccine Injuries and Senators Want to Know Why

After forcing U.S. service members to receive the COVID-19 vaccine or be released from the military, the Biden administration is refusing to provide disability status for soldiers injured by the jab. A number of Republican Senators are demanding to know why.

"We write for clarification on the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) policy for veterans who have injuries resulting from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine while in service. As you are aware, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) required all service members to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Many service members, despite hesitations against receiving the vaccine, chose to be vaccinated to continue their service to our country," Senators Marco Rubio, Mike Braun, Tom Cotton, Rick Scott, Ted Cruz, and Steve Daines wrote in a letter to Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough.

"Thousands of service members were discharged from service as a result of refusing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Yet, some U.S. service members received the vaccine to maintain their service and have since experienced lasting health impacts as a result," they continued. "If our government is asking service members to receive a vaccine, we must be cognizant that there will be unintended side effects that may cause lifelong impacts on their health. We must keep our promise to support our service members, including ensuring those who come to the VA for help with COVID-19 vaccine injuries are justly compensated and receive the care that they deserve."

The Senators also pointed out that the department has provided disability for injuries from vaccines for years but isn't doing so for the COVID-19 shot.

"For years, the VA has evaluated the health effects of certain vaccinations that veterans received during their service, and have expressed concern with certain health impacts arising from these vaccinations," they wrote. "The agency has also provided several resources to veterans seeking the COVID-19 vaccination, but no clear information about how to support members who are injured as a result of the vaccine. Given the high rate of service members who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 under DoD’s mandate, we request information as to how the VA is considering vaccine-related injuries in determining VA benefits and disability claims."

The Senators are seeking information from McDonough about how the department is handling claims.

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

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

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

Thursday, October 12, 2023


‘We Can't Force the Human Body to Accept Foreign Genetic Code': Dr. McCullough on mRNA Technology

Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough warned that messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines inject “foreign genetic code” into human beings, which the body fails to break down or expel for a prolonged period of time.

Research on mRNA “has been going on for decades,” Dr. McCullough said during an Oct. 5 interview. The 2023 Nobel Prize for medicine was awarded to two scientists for making “messenger RNA long-lasting in the human body,” he said. “I mean, it has been tested in multiple applications … It's an absolute bust. It was just the worst idea ever to install the genetic code for a lethal protein without being able to shut it off. It wasn't the fact that it was rushed; it's just ill-conceived from the very beginning.”

“We can't force the human body to accept foreign genetic code and produce a foreign protein … Messenger RNA for vaccines is a completely failed concept. It’s a dangerous concept, and the U.S. government wasn't honest. They should have been honest. Trump should have come out and said, ‘Listen, it's on our website; our military's been working on this since 2012.’”

During a testimony at the European Parliament last month, Dr. McCullough said, “There's not a single study showing that the messenger RNA is broken down” in the human body once it is injected. “There's not a study showing it leaves the body.” Since the vaccines are “made synthetically, they cannot be broken down.”

He added that the lethal protein from the [COVID-19] vaccines found in the human body after vaccination was found to be circulating “at least for six months, if not longer.”

In the case of seasonal jabs, that is, taking an injection or booster at the end of six months as recommended by the authorities, “there's another installation in more circulating potentially lethal protein.”

Scientist Drew Weissman, who won the 2023 Nobel Prize in Medicine for his role in developing mRNA technology, warned in a 2018 paper that not only did clinical trials of mRNA vaccines produce “more modest [results] in humans than was expected based on animal models,” but that the “side effects were not trivial.”

Dr. Mccullough’s comments come as the Gates Foundation is spending $40 million on countries in Africa and other economically backward nations to produce new mRNA vaccines in efforts to prevent diseases like tuberculosis and malaria.

Concealing a ‘Global Security Threat’

In the Steve Deace interview, Dr. McCullough said that the ineffectiveness of the technology was not unknown to the government since they’ve been testing it for nearly 40 years.
He referred to a February 2023 paper published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), which cited that the U.S. government has been investing billions of dollars in developing messenger RNA technology since 1985.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) began investing in mRNA tech in 2011. DARPA then launched the Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3) program in 2016 that sought to produce “relevant numbers of doses” against infections within 60 days of identifying them.

The ADEPT P3 was a program by the U.S. military “to end pandemics in 60 days.” There is no other technology “that our government has invested more in,” Dr. McCullough said.

Dr. McCullough cited another paper that stated there were “over 9,000 patents on messenger RNA. And all the patent assignees are big entities. At the top is Sanofi, then Cervavac, BioNTech, Moderna, and the U.S. government. No single person invented messenger RNA. Someone who comes up in 2021 and says, ‘You know I invented it’. That's impossible. This has been going on for decades.”

Dr. McCullough pointed out that the United States and China have been in “collaboration for years” in their research on infectious and lethal coronavirus.

However, officials like Anthony Fauci, the former head of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Francis Collins, the former head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and “a whole cadre of scientists, they collaborated to conceal this global security threat.”

“They actually intentionally lied to the world and said the virus came out of nature. They knew it came out of the Wuhan lab,” he said, citing a research paper by Ralph Baric and Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi that was published in the Nature journal in 2015.
Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi is affiliated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, while Mr. Baric is from the Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

“They said they created SARS-CoV-2 virus. They called it the Wuhan Institute of Virology 1 virus. That was the prototype SARS-CoV-2. So, that's in 2015. Instead of bringing Ralph Baric out [and asking] ‘Dr. Baric, how do we get ourselves out of this disaster,’ you masterminded this virus funded by the US.”

‘Pull All COVID-19 Vaccines Off the Market’

In his interview, Dr. McCullough made three recommendations. “I say number one, I've called in the US Senate [and] now the European Parliament [to] pull all COVID-19 vaccines off the market before anyone else is harmed.”

“Number two, US, EU and all westernized Nations [should] pull out of the WHO. They're not trustable. And number three, I'm following the World Council for Health. I am recommending a halt on all childhood vaccines, the entire vaccine schedule until this is clarified since messenger RNA is now on the schedule without any concerns for safety.

While some studies related to the safety of COVID-19 vaccines have shown the jabs to be safe, others have raised concerns about the safety of the shots.

A December 2022 study analyzed trials comparing vaccine recipients with individuals who did not receive a vaccine or were given a placebo.

It concluded that “compared to placebo, most vaccines reduce, or likely reduce, the proportion of participants with confirmed symptomatic COVID-19, and for some, there is high-certainty evidence that they reduce severe or critical disease.”

However, a June 2022 study that looked at mRNA vaccinations found that “Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest (AESI).”

“The excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest surpassed the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group in both Pfizer and Moderna trials.”

‘Shedding’ the Infection

During the interview, Mr. Deace asked about hearing issues that he and his colleague suffered and whether they had any ties with the vaccines. While he did not take a COVID-19 shot, the colleague was vaccinated. Mr. Deace asked if this was “further proof that basically the last few years Peter everybody was a lab rat whether you took the vaccine or not.”

“It's true, nearly all of us have been exposed to the Wuhan spike protein,” Dr. McCullough replied. “When I see patients in the office, we check antibodies against the spike protein. Invariably, they're elevated. Rarely, I'll find somebody who hasn't been exposed.”

Dr. McCullough pointed out that there are “clear-cut papers” showing individuals suffering hearing loss after taking COVID-19 jabs. “It's all related to the spike protein,” he said. mRNA vaccines work by instructing cells in the body to produce the spike protein found on the surface of the COVID-19 virus.

Once vaccinated, an individual’s muscle cells begin producing spike protein pieces, displaying them on cell surfaces, which end up triggering the immune system to create antibodies. When such an individual gets infected with the COVID-19 virus, these antibodies will then fight the virus.

Dr. McCullough warned that even people who have not received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can eventually get affected by messenger RNA through a vaccinated individual via “shedding.”

“Shedding means that one has been exposed to the spike protein or to the messenger RNA from close contact with another individual. We know both of them can travel via exosomes which are small phospholipid packets that can be exhaled [via] breath, through sweat, [and] various forms of body fluid, typically you know very close contact.”

“There was a big project called the Eva project in the UK showing 78 percent of women who take a vaccine—they actually have menstrual abnormalities. And those who even didn't take a vaccine, they end up having menstrual abnormalities. There's been plenty of these reports that have occurred.”

Dr. McCullough cited an interview he did with scientist Helene Banoun, an expert on shedding, who believes such things “clearly happens, for sure, in people who've taken the vaccine within 30 days, close contact.”

“Now, two studies—one in the United States, one in Japan—[show] the messenger RNA comes through breast milk. The spike protein may be shedded potentially for a much longer duration of time. It's been shown in the human body now for months, maybe even years afterward. And that's the rationale for what our recent proposal to actually undergo spike protein detoxification.”

The cardiologist pointed out that “every signal” related to cardiovascular disease, neurologic disease, blood clots, immune disease, and cancer “is up.”

“There can be debates on why all these chronic diseases are up, all-cause mortality up in every single area of the world,” he said. “The two big exposures we've had are COVID-19 infection and now COVID-19 vaccines, and I think both mechanisms have led to this wave of disease.”

“I think more powerfully with the vaccines since the vaccines are largely genetic, they're given every six months, and they install the genetic code for the disease-promoting and lethal Wuhan spike protein.”

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

FDA Has Results of Subclinical Myocarditis Studies, but Won't Release Them Yet

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received results from two studies of subclinical heart inflammation following Moderna COVID-19 vaccination, but is refusing to release them to the public—at least for now.

FDA officials in January 2022 directed Moderna to run three prospective studies on subclinical myocarditis, or heart inflammation without symptoms, after COVID-19 booster vaccination. One study, mRNA-1273-P204, would examine the incidence of subclinical myocarditis in children aged 6 months through 11 years. Another, mRNA-1273-P203, would examine the incidence in adolescents aged 12 years through 17 years. The third, mRNA-1273-P301, would examine the incidence in adults.

Moderna has shared the results of the P203 study with the FDA, an FDA spokeswoman told The Epoch Times in an email. But she declined to provide them. To obtain the results, she said, The Epoch Times would need to request them under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

"The FDA doesn’t post PMR/PMC study reports," she said, using acronyms for postmarketing requirements and postmarketing commitments, or requirements and commitments pharmaceutical companies make when receiving FDA clearance for their products. "They may be requested under FOIA."

The spokeswoman did not disclose why the FDA doesn't release the results absent a FOIA request.

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

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

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

Wednesday, October 11, 2023


SSRN and medRxiv Censor Counter-Narrative Science

Huge blockages to getting skeptical science about Covid published

Jay Bhattacharya1 and Steve H. Hanke

Chapter XI of Friedrich Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom is titled “The End of Truth.” Hayek develops the idea that to function and maintain power, totalitarian regimes must use propaganda to establish an official doctrine:

The need for such official doctrines as an instrument of directing and rallying the efforts of the people has been clearly foreseen by the various theoreticians of the totalitarian system. Plato’s “noble lies” and Sorel’s “myths” serve the same purpose as the racial doctrine of the Nazis or the theory of the cooperative state of Mussolini. They are all necessarily based on particular views about facts which are then elaborated into scientific theories in order to justify a preconceived opinion. (Hayek 1965, 157)

To be effective, propaganda must exhibit monopoly power, with no dissent allowed and “all information that might cause doubt or hesitation…withheld” (Hayek 1965, 160). Hayek grew up in Vienna and lived there until 1931. He had first-hand experience with totalitarianism and studied its operations. He dedicated much of his professional life to understanding the causes of bad government and combatting its brutalities.

So, we may ask: has covid brought an end to truth? We answer by accounting our covid research experiences, as well as those of others. Before doing so, we reflect on how matters of public health, such as covid, fit into Hayek’s “The End of Truth.”

There is perhaps nothing that opens the door to censorship wider than the fear of disease and the prospect of an early death. Indeed, there is nothing that matches a looming pandemic to generate fear. And there is nothing like fear to grease the skids of censorship.

In the present article, we use the word censorship in the sense of the first definition of the transitive verb censor given at Wiktionary (link): “To review for, and if necessary to remove or suppress, content from books, films, correspondence, and other media which is regarded as objectionable (for example, obscene, likely to incite violence, or sensitive).”

This definition does not confine censorship to activity undertaken by governmental players. We believe that a line that is connoted by censorship, a line that distinguishes censorship from plain and honest content curation, has been crossed by SSRN and medRxiv. That line has to do with violating terms and conditions, even if those are only tacitly understood and are derived from established convention, and with the violations deriving from motives like those that drive government censorship. Indeed, we would not rule out the possibility governmental pressures are playing a role in the censorship perpetrated by SSRN and medRxiv.

So, how does covid fit into this picture? A signal event in the timeline of Western covid lockdowns occurred on March 16, 2020, with the publication of the Imperial College London covid report (Ferguson et al. 2020). Its frightening predictions sent shock waves around the world. The next day, the government threw the United Kingdom into lockdown.

The impact of the report was amplified by the United Kingdom’s soft-power machine, the BBC. Its reach has no equal: broadcasting in 42 languages, reaching 468 million people worldwide each week, and efficiently disseminating its message (Barber 2022). With the BBC in full cry and the public genuinely alarmed, there was little room or tolerance for dissent. In the United Kingdom, the government put its recently established Counter Disinformation Unit on full covid alert, to stamp out dissent (Investigations Team 2023).

A copycat cascade then took hold, with the United States and other countries embracing the UK government’s messaging and policies. The result was a policy based on a defective model (see Herby et al. 2023a, 28–29) that originated at Imperial College London under the leadership of Professor Neil Ferguson, who is the director of Imperial College’s School of Public Health.

UK policymakers should have been aware that Professor Ferguson’s Imperial College team had a history of defective modeling and a track record littered with what are little more than fantasy numbers. To put the blunders of the Imperial College London’s epidemiological fear machine into context, consider the numbers generated by the modelers in 2005, when Professor Ferguson suggested that “up to around 200 million” could die from bird flu globally. He justified this claim by comparing the lethality of bird flu to that of the 1918 Spanish flu outbreak, which killed 40 million (Sturcke 2005). By 2021, bird flu had only killed 456 people worldwide (WHO 2021). And, there were other huge misses by the Imperial College London’s modelers: foot and mouth in 2001, mad cow in 2002, and swine flu in 2009 (Hanke and Dowd 2022).

SSRN censors Herby, Jonung, and Hanke

The Social Science Research Network (SSRN), operated by Netherlandsbased publishing house Elsevier, is an enormous platform in academia. SSRN is extremely important to professors for disseminating their research results and for advancing within the academic community. Indeed, as of September 25, 2023, the SSRN provided 1,271,271 research papers from 1,381,280 researchers in 70 disciplines, per its homepage (link). SSRN is the leading site for academic working papers. It platforms research irrespective of whether the research has been submitted, accepted, or published in journals. Such platforming of research is vital for giving space to all voices, to make scholarship contestable and challengeable, and without delay or stonewalling.

The gatekeeping role of the journals is also a vital facet of the common enterprise of scholarship—but it is separate from the realm of the working paper, and it should continue to be kept separate. If SSRN wishes to play the role of scholarly gatekeeper, it is obliged to assume that role responsibly, which includes clarifying its gatekeeping procedures and living up to the procedures it purports to follow, avoiding double-standards.

Here is what SSRN says (as of September 25, 2023) about its policies regarding “Contributed Content” (link):

Contributed content should be relevant to the subject scope of SSRN. Content may not be illegal, obscene, defamatory, threatening, infringing of intellectual property rights, invasive of privacy or otherwise injurious or objectionable. Elsevier does not pre-screen or regularly review any contributed content, but Elsevier has the right (though not the obligation) to monitor submissions to determine compliance with these Terms and any operating rules to satisfy any law, regulation, or authorized government request.

Needless to say, none of the SSRN-censored research products mentioned in the present article runs afoul of the guidelines against material that is “illegal, obscene, defamatory, threatening, infringing of intellectual property rights,” or “invasive of privacy.” As for “otherwise injurious or objectionable,” if that is the grounds for SSRN’s censorship, it is something they should declare and defend. Thus far, SSRN has failed to do so.

More here:

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

Hydroxychloroquine Reduces COVID-19 Mortality, Study Finds

People who took hydroxychloroquine in combination with another drug while hospitalized with COVID-19 were less likely to die than those who didn't, according to a new study.

Hydroxychloroquine, which is widely used against malaria and arthritis, was given to hundreds of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium. Thousands of others didn't receive the drug.

Researchers examined records from 352 adults hospitalized in AZ Groeninge Hospital in Kortrijk, Belgium. All patients tested positive for COVID-19 or had results from CT scans that suggested COVID-19 was present. Patients received hydroxychloroquine alone or with azithromycin, an antibiotic. They were scanned before and after treatment.

Researchers compared the results of the record analysis with a control group of 3,533 people hospitalized across Belgium with COVID-19 from March 14, 2020, to May 24, 2020. The people didn't receive hydroxychloroquine but did receive standard of care.

Twenty-eight days following the diagnosis of COVID-19, 59 people treated with hydroxychloroquine had died. The mortality percentage, or 16.7 percent, was lower than the 25.9 percentage in the control group.

Researchers found patients who received hydroxychloroquine were more likely to survive even after adjusting for age and other factors.

"Our study suggests that, despite the controversy surrounding its use, treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin remains a viable option," Dr. Gert Meeus, a nephrologist with AZ Groeninge Hospital, and other researchers wrote.

The study was published by the journal New Microbes and New Infections. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and differences between the treatment and control groups, including the former being younger on average. Authors declared no conflicts of interest or funding.

The research adds to a mixed dataset on hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19.

Some other studies have found that hydroxychloroquine recipients were less likely to die, including a study that analyzed records from a health system in Michigan. Many of the positive findings concerned hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin.

Others have found little or no evidence that hydroxychloroquine affects COVID-19, including a U.S.-government funded study across 34 hospitals.

Multiple studies on hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 have been retracted.

Hydroxychloroquine is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration but the agency has warned since mid-2020 against using it for COVID-19. Belgian regulators rescinded authorization for hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 in June 2020.

Dosage Issue?

Hydroxychloroquine proponents say that the amount of the drug, and when it's given, is key to properly studying how it affects COVID-19.

Dr. Meeus and the other Belgian researchers acknowledged clinical trials that did not find a benefit for hydroxychloroquine, as well as some observational studies. Other observational papers have suggested hydroxychloroquine is effective.

"A potential explanation for the discrepancy between the results in the observational trials and the large randomized trials may be the use of a different dose of hydroxychloroquine," they said.

The researchers started with 400 milligrams, two times a day, on day one. That was followed by 200 milligrams a day for five days, in line with national guidelines.

In the clinical trials that found no benefit, patients received four times as much hydroxychloroquine.

"Our treatment was lower and also used the antibiotic azithromycin. This double treatment is a possible explanation for why we found positive effects, but other studies did not," Dr. Meeus told Doorbraak.

Peter Horby, a spokesman for one of the trials, told The Epoch Times previously that the dosage amounts were "carefully selected" and "designed to achieve the concentrations needed to inhibit the virus as quickly and safely as possible."
Dr. Meeus told Doorbraak that further research needs to be done on the drug, or HCQ, but that it very well could be beneficial.

"HCQ is not a panacea, and of course, further research needs to be done. After all, you can't just conclude from an observational study like ours whether something works or not," he said. "But look, we have followed the protocol as it was originally prescribed in Belgium. A study ... also showed in early 2020 that HCQ did lead to lower mortality. If the results of our study confirm this again, we think it is very plausible that the drug has helped quite a few patients."

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

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

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