Wednesday, January 10, 2024
People More Likely to Suffer Vertigo, Tinnitus Soon After COVID-19 Vaccination: Study
People were more likely to present with tinnitus and vertigo shortly after COVID-19 vaccination, Australian researchers reported in a new study.
Some 65,468 visits to general practices with an audiovestibular problem were recorded in a database called POLAR that collects data from the practices, the researchers found. The visits, in Victoria and New South Wales, were more likely to happen within 42 days of a COVID-19 shot.
Another 678 problems relating to the ear were reported within 42 days of a vaccine dose to the Surveillance of Adverse Events Following Vaccination In the Community, or SAEFVIC, a surveillance system in Victoria, in the timeframe studied.
That timeframe was January 2021 to March 2023.
A safety signal, or sign the vaccines may cause the problems, was established for tinnitus and vertigo, according to the new paper.
Researchers found that there was an increase in general practice visits with vertigo following a Moderna or Pfizer vaccination, and visits with tinnitus after a Moderna, Pfizer, or AstraZeneca vaccine. At the same time, there was no increase in visits with hearing loss.
New COVID Variant Spreading in US, but Risk Is Low: Experts
The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use modified messenger RNA (mRNA) technology while AstraZeneca’s vaccine uses an adenovirus.
A separate analysis of SAEFVIC found that reports of audiovestibular problems were more common after AstraZeneca vaccination than after a Moderna or Pfizer shot. That analysis excluded, owing to what researchers said were insufficient records, reports of problems after certain kinds of COVID-19 vaccines, including one version of Pfizer’s vaccine and Novavax’s vaccine.
“This is the first study that demonstrates an increase in audiovestibular presentations following COVID-19 vaccination, in particular, vertigo and tinnitus. Healthcare providers and vaccinees should be alert to potential audiovestibular complaints after COVID-19 vaccination,” Dr. Aishwarya Shetty, with the Centre for Health Analytics at The Melbourne Children’s Campus, and her co-authors wrote.
The paper was published ahead of peer review on the medRxiv server. Dr. Shetty did not respond to a request for comment, including whether the study has been submitted to any journals for peer review. Pfizer and the other vaccine manufacturers did not respond to requests for comment.
Methods
Tinnitus, or ringing in the head, has particularly been previously linked in case reports and patient accounts with COVID-19 vaccination.
To explore the possible relationship, the Australian group took the primary care data and conducted what’s called a self-controlled case series. In such an analysis, comparisons are made using the same people but different periods of time. In this study, the method involved examining visits for audiovestibular conditions and separating out visits that happened within 42 days of vaccination. Any visits in the time periods before and after that window were used as comparison.
For all audiovestibular conditions, including hearing loss, people were more likely to present within 42 days of vaccination than during the other time periods. When analyzing by specific condition, the increased risk of vertigo after mRNA vaccination and the increased risk of tinnitus after all vaccines was statistically significant while the increased risk of hearing loss was not.
The researchers also calculated the rates of reports of the conditions made to SAEFVIC per 100,000 doses. They found people were about two times more likely to suffer from most hearing problems after AstraZeneca vaccination than after Pfizer or Moderna vaccination.
The rates of reported audiovestibular conditions were 9.7 per 100,000 AstraZeneca doses and 5 per 100,000 mRNA shots. The rates of reported vertigo cases were 5.9 per 100,000 AstraZeneca doses and 3.1 per 100,000 mRNA doses, while the rates of reported cases of tinnitus were 3.2 per 100,000 AstraZeneca doses and 1.7 per 100,000 mRNA doses.
One theory to explain the difference is that older people, who face a greater risk of vertigo, predominantly received the AstraZeneca vaccine, the researchers said.
Some previous papers, such as one from the United States, have not found an increase in tinnitus after COVID-19 vaccination, but those mostly relied on self-reports “and are prone to recall bias,” according to the Australian researchers.
Limitations of the paper included not capturing people who reported to health care settings outside of general practices.
The authors reported no conflicts of interest. Funding was listed by the Department of Health in Victoria.
Increased Risk Versus Unvaccinated
In another new study released on medRxiv, South Korean researchers reported finding vaccinated people were at increased risk of tinnitus and ear disease when compared to unvaccinated people.
Taking data from a national health care database, the researchers said vaccinated people three months after vaccination had increased rates of tinnitus, inner ear disease, middle ear disease, and other ear disease.
The researchers said the results showed COVID-19 vaccination “significantly increased” the risks of what they described as non-fatal adverse events, such as tinnitus.
The group found that females were more likely to suffer from tinnitus and ear disease than males, and that people who received a non-mRNA vaccine were more likely to suffer from tinnitus and inner ear disease than those who received an mRNA shot. On the other hand, the risk was about the same across vaccine types for middle ear disease and higher for mRNA recipients for other ear disease.
The researchers reported no conflicts of interest and no funding.
*********************************************
UK: The conspiracy of silence around Covid even four years on betrays our values
It is more than four years since the World Health Organisation was tipped off about a mysterious new disease that had emerged in Wuhan. This proved to be the start of a deadly pandemic as the virus hurtled round the planet, sparking the most serious public health catastrophe for a century.
Now, it is beyond dispute that China’s dictatorship covered up Covid’s eruption in Wuhan – with disastrous consequences. The regime’s officials hid the initial outbreak, silenced whistleblowers and censored data that could have saved millions of lives.
Yet, last year, when Michael Gove told the UK Covid-19 inquiry there was ‘a significant body of judgment that believes that the virus itself was man-made’ he was slapped down as the lead counsel, Hugo Keith, told him: ‘We’re not going to go there.’
So this bloated, costly inquiry is happy to admonish British politicians while ignoring the much bigger issue of whether the pandemic was sparked by cutting-edge scientific research or if there was ‘natural’ transmission from infected animals.
Keith’s hasty response reflected the desperate efforts of Western political, scientific and media establishments to stifle such discussion as they kowtow to China’s bullying rulers and cover up funding ties to risky research outsourced to Wuhan labs.
Zero reliable evidence has emerged to back claims of zoonotic (animal to animal) transmission. But there has been a steady trickle of evidence to suggest that it may be no coincidence that Covid emerged in the city with China’s maximum bio-safety lab, the biggest repository of bat coronaviruses in Asia.
I have reported on these issues since early 2020 – and it has been deeply disturbing to witness systemic attempts to shackle debate for it corrodes public confidence in science, politics and the media.
Obstruction has been led by heads of key American and British funding bodies. Yet last month a study disclosed 309 laboratory-acquired infections between 2000 and 2021 – along with 16 cases of pathogens escaping a laboratory.
Alarming details about the work in Wuhan and China’s cover-up have been exposed along with concerns over ‘Wild West’ safety and details of secret schemes to boost the infectivity of coronaviruses.
Today, there is growing acceptance that a laboratory incident might have caused the pandemic.
While no one knows for sure the answer to this scientific riddle, one thing is clear. There has been a toxic conspiracy of silence in collusion with China over Covid’s origins that has betrayed the values of democracy and science.
This undermines all efforts to prepare for the next pandemic.
********************************************************
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
***************************************************
Tuesday, January 09, 2024
New research finds the natural seasonality of coronaviruses had more influence on the COVID-19 pandemic than government interventions
A new international study on the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in six northern European countries has unexpectedly discovered that the pre-existing seasonal nature of coronaviruses may have played more of a role during the pandemic than any of the government public health intervention policies – including vaccinations, lockdowns, masks and travel restrictions. The scientific study was published in the peer-reviewed journal, Journal of Clinical Medicine.
The international team of scientists and medical experts used 10 years of human coronavirus monitoring data collected in Sweden before the pandemic to estimate the seasonal variations in coronavirus incidence in northern Europe. They then used publicly available data on the COVID-19 pandemic for six northern European countries (Ireland, UK, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland) to compare the relative contributions to the progression of the pandemic in each country of: (1) seasonality; (2) vaccination programmes; and (3) other public health measures. They studied the various waves of the pandemic from early 2020 until May 2023, when the WHO declared the public health emergency over.
The authors found that the increases and decreases of each wave consistently followed the natural seasonal behaviour of coronaviruses – increasing during the winter “cold and flu season” and decreasing during the summer. In contrast, the scientific team were surprised to find no clear or consistent influence from either the vaccination programmes or the many public health interventions that were implemented.
The lead author, Dr. Gerry Quinn, a research scientist specialising in microbiology and immunology, described the significance of these surprising findings as follows:
“Since the start of the pandemic, governments and societies around the world have been implementing unprecedented measures in an attempt to control the spread of the virus. Whenever cases began to fall, many people believed that this was due to the public health interventions. But, a careful examination of all the available data shows that this belief was mistaken. It now transpires that most of the changes were probably due to natural seasonal changes of coronaviruses.”
Another author of the study, Prof. Karol Sikora (Medical Director of Cancer Partners International and Consultant Oncologist; former Director of the WHO Cancer Programme), emphasised:
“The finding that most of the apparent successes of the government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were actually due to the natural seasonality of coronaviruses makes the negative health impacts of the lockdowns and other interventions even more disturbing. In the UK, we are still reeling from the harms these policies caused for cancer treatment and diagnosis and many other health concerns throughout the pandemic. Now, it seems that these dramatic health interventions did not even noticeably alter the progression of the pandemic.”
Prof. Norman Fenton, a Professor Emeritus of Risk at Queen Mary University of London and a mathematician who specialises in data analysis and statistics, was also a co-author. He warned that,
“From the beginning of the pandemic, there have been major problems in the interpretation of the publicly available COVID-19 data. During the first waves, health agencies were still developing, changing and increasing testing capacity. This meant that initial attempts to evaluate the COVID-19 public health measures were hindered by inconsistencies in the official data. Ambiguities in the definitions of COVID-19 vaccination statuses also led to considerable confusion in assessing the impacts of the vaccination programmes. Another problem was that many of the model-based studies only considered either the first or the second wave.
However, this comprehensive new study overcame many of these statistical challenges by considering five different indicators of the pandemic and separately analysing each country over multiple waves of the pandemic. The results show that the overwhelming influence of seasonality created a false, and scientifically invalid, confidence in the many previously untested public health interventions that most governments used.”
********************************************************
Monday, January 08, 2024
'Vaccine victims' left with life-changing injuries from the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid jab say they've been censored online when speaking out
I have put this up as a free-speech issue but it is of course a medical issue too. So I thought I might mention that I got two shots of the AstraZeneca vaccine and did not get even a sore arm out of it. And I gather that most recipients were not significantly troubled by it. So the people who are complaining below may be:
1). Blaming the vaccine for some injury that had another cause. Many things may oocur in close sequence without one causing the other.
2). Affected by some rare pre-existing physical condition that interacted with the vaccine.
In both cases it is a bit much to blame the vaccine-makers for failing to see and prevent the problems concerned
People who were left with life-changing injuries after being given the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid jab claim they have been censored while trying to speak out on social media about their symptoms.
They believe they are vaccine victims who suffered a number of severe reactions, including a father-of-two who formed a blood clot after being given the vaccine in spring 2021 causing a permanent brain injury.
The man is in the process of suing the pharmaceutical giant at the High Court in London over the injury, while the widower of a woman who died from the jab has also brought a claim.
Now other 'victims' who claim they reacted badly to the jab who are not involved in legal proceedings have claimed sites such as Facebook have given them 'warnings' when they have tried to speak to others about their experiences.
They alleged that they are being forced to 'self censor' and speak in cryptic language to avoid having groups shut down, the Telegraph reported.
UK CV Family - a private Facebook group with over 1,000 members for those who claim they were left injured or bereaved by the Covid vaccines - has had to take steps to avoid being shut down.
The group began in November 2021 Charlet Crichton, 42, after she suffered an adverse reaction from the AstraZeneca jab after it was given to her while she was volunteering at a vaccination centre in Folkestone, Kent.
The bad reaction led Ms Crichton to become bed bound for weeks and has since been forced to give up her Sports Therapy business which she ran for 13 years.
She told the paper: 'I set up the group because I was finding people online in the UK like me. And we felt we didn't have anyone to talk to about it apart from each other.'
The Facebook group is now one of three online groups for those bereaved by the vaccine to have been granted core-participant status in the Covid Inquiry.
This means Ms Crichton, who claims she suffered from myocarditis following the jab, and other members of the group will be able to give evidence throughout the statutory process.
In the page's description it stresses that it is 'not anti-vax' and asks participants to 'refrain from posting anything that suggests otherwise'.
'We very quickly learned that we had to self censor, otherwise we'd be shut down,' she added, explaining that her own comments had previously be blocked 'to prevent misuse'.
On one occasion Ms Critchon said her account was even banned after Meta claimed it did not meet its standards, while she claims others have been shadow banned - meaning individuals posts are hidden - over their comments.
'It's very, very difficult because we want to talk about what we're going through,' she added.
On a separate occasion, YouTube tried to censor a video of lawyers giving evidence at the Covid Inquiry about the vaccines. The streaming giant said the clip was a violation of 'medical misinformation policy'.
The paper also said that footage of Stephen Bowie, a member of the Scottish Vaccine Injury Group who suffered a spinal stroke and blood clots following the jab, was also flagged with a similar warning.
Molly Kingsley, the co-founder of Us4Them, said the restrictions put in place by social media platforms were 'Orwellian' after her views by the Government's Counter Disinformation Unit were allegedly criticsed by YouTube.
***********************************
Why Florida's Surgeon General Has Called for a 'Halt' in the Use of mRNA COVID Vaccines
Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo is calling for a “halt” in the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines over a health risk federal officials dispute.
In a Dec. 6 letter, Ladapo addressed his concerns “pertaining to the safety assessments and the discovery of billions of DNA fragments per dose of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines” to the directors of the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
But federal officials have strongly disagreed with his assessment.
A top FDA official last month pushed back against Ladapo and what the FDA called "the proliferation of misinformation" on vaccine safety.
Ladapo raised concerns about the agency's approval of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in a Dec. 6 letter to FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert M. Califf and CDC Director Dr. Mandy Cohen. His letter cited a pre-print study that, according to the surgeon general, showed there are "billions of DNA fragments per dose of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines."
Pointing to FDA guidance on vaccines that "use novel methods of delivery regarding DNA integration," Ladapo questioned whether the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines had been assessed to meet FDA's standards, noting a potential risk of cancer.
In a written response, Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, wrote that it is "implausible" that residual small DNA fragments could find their way into the nucleus of human cells and then alter DNA to cause cancer.
"We would like to make clear that based on a thorough assessment of the entire manufacturing process, FDA is confident in the quality, safety, and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines," Marks wrote in a Dec. 14 letter. "Additionally, with over a billion doses of the mRNA vaccines administered, no safety concerns related to residual DNA have been identified." (Fox News)
But Ladapo said the FDA’s response did not adequately address his concerns.
“The FDA’s response does not provide data or evidence that the DNA integration assessments they recommended themselves have been performed,” he said in a statement. “Instead, they pointed to genotoxicity studies – which are inadequate assessments for DNA integration risk. In addition, they obfuscated the difference between the SV40 promoter/enhancer and SV40 proteins, two elements that are distinct.
“DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health and to the integrity of the human genome, including the risk that DNA integrated into sperm or egg gametes could be passed onto offspring of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients,” Ladapo continued. “If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.”
********************************************************
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, January 07, 2024
Apparently, Elderly Patients in Europe Died After Receiving the Pfizer Vaccine. Why Has There Been No Widespread Reporting?
Late last year, TrialSite News reported on a Brown University study analyzing the Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines. “The study team summarized that when comparing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 with Moderna (mRNA-1273), the latter was associated with a lower risk of adverse events, possibly due to improved protection against COVID-19. Put another way, Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine represents a higher-risk product for the elderly.
Yet this finding has never seen the light of day in mainstream media. “However, though not widespread, there have been some reports on the risk of the Covid vaccine to the elderly. TrialSite reported all during the pandemic from one concern to another involving regulatory shortcuts, to anomalies to hundreds of articles involving COVID-19 vaccine injuries with Pfizer-BioNTech. A group of scientists known as “Team #3” found bombshell information that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was associated with over twice the number of deaths during the pivotal 20-week clinical trial than the placebo group. The scientists found that data was suppressed by Pfizer, hence the FDA would not have been able to detect the safety signal.
Reports in 2021
In February of 2021, an article about all 78 elderly residents of a Spanish nursing home in Madrid developing COVID-19 after being vaccinated with the Pfizer jab surfaced. Note the article was published in the Global Times, which is a China-based media, and thus does raise a question of objectivity.
The residents contracted the virus after receiving the first dose of the shot and seven of them died. But in November of the same year, an article was published claiming deaths attributed to the Covid jab in Spain, “cannot be linked to Covid-19 vaccines by the mere fact of being notified until a study confirms the causal relationship between the vaccine and death or the serious side effect."
In other words, if a person dies due to a blood clot a few days after getting vaccinated against COVID-19, there is an undeniable possibility that this may have occurred for other reasons than the COVID-19 vaccine.
But Spain wasn’t the only country in Europe to report elderly deaths after receiving the Pfizer Covid shot. Norway investigated the demise of 23 seniors after getting the Pfizer jab. The Norwegian Medicines Agency labeled the victims as “frail” and such common adverse reactions to the mRNA vaccine such as nausea and fever may have contributed to the deaths.
In a statement, the agency said, “We cannot rule out that adverse reactions to the vaccine occurring within the first days following vaccination (such as fever and nausea) may contribute to a more serious course and fatal outcome in patients with severe underlying disease.” This news was covered by mainstream CNN.
However, also The British Medical Journal (BMJ) went further. It published an article in May of 2021, saying the Norwegian review said the “Pfizer-BioNTech covid-19 vaccine is ‘likely’ to have been responsible for at least 10 deaths of frail elderly people in nursing homes in Norway, an expert review commissioned by the Norwegian Medicines Agency has concluded.”
The Norwegian report further conveyed that even though the mortality rate in nursing homes was generally very high and deaths of nursing home residents were anticipated after vaccination, the review concluded “a causal link between the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and death was considered ‘likely’ in 10 of the 100 cases, ‘possible’ in 26 cases, and ‘unlikely’ in 59 cases. The remaining five were deemed ‘unclassifiable.’”
In Switzerland, at least 16 elderly people reportedly died after receiving the Covid vaccine according to the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic). The agency said it had recorded about 364 suspected adverse drug reactions, with 199 incidents linked to the vaccines developed by Pfizer and BioNTech and 154 to the Moderna jab.
TrialSite also tracked data in Australia after mass vaccination with both mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna. By the end of Q1 2022—a period when nearly the entire Australian population was fully vaccinated—more than double the number of people who died from COVID-19 in those three months than all of 2020 and 2021 combined. See “Heavily Vaxxed Australia First 3.5 Months of 2022 has Double the COVID-19 Deaths from 2020-2021 Combined.”
Underreported
Last year, Northern Irish politicians were complaining about the underreporting of deaths related to the COVID-19 vaccines. In June of 2021, MDPI, which is a publisher of peer-reviewed open-access journals, published a paper by a group of European medical professionals questioning the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine, which was later retracted. Members of the journal’s board resigned afterward.
The question is, why does the possible danger of Pfizer’s Covid vaccine seem to be covered up and what kind of power and influence does the pharmaceutical company have over the European Union and the United States?
********************************************************
Florida Clinic Conducting Large Ivermectin Study Targeting COVID-19
Dr. Patrick Robinson and his partner Dana Robinson run the Matters of Beauty aesthetics and med spa clinic in San Antonio, Florida. The duo registered a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulated cohort, a prospective observational study targeting 1,000 patients.
Can the clinic’s patients who opt for ivermectin as a regimen against COVID-19 have a faster path to recovery and keep out of the hospital more than others? The Robinsons are to be commended for making the investment to study the benefits of ivermectin formally. They are following other front-line physicians who made the investment to design and execute formal, organized studies including another Florida-based husband and wife team Drs. Jean-Jacques Rajter and Juliana Cepelowicz both with Broward Health, who led the well-known ICON study, with promising results published in the journal Chest.
Also, Malibu, California-based Dr. Sabine Hazan, a pioneer in microbiome-based research, became the first independent physician to formally register an ivermectin-based clinical trial in the United States during the pandemic. While other physicians have established practices involving ivermectin in various protocols, such efforts were based on their own formal studies within their clinics, registered in Clinicaltrials.gov, for example.
The study, registered in Clinicltrials.gov in May 2022, is scheduled to conclude this May 2024.
The Study
Patients at local physician clinics, as well as my Matters of Beauty, are enrolled when they are evaluated for COVID-19. Patients enrollment is, of course, voluntary and based on their request for treatment with ivermectin.
These patients will be questioned on symptoms and the timing of those symptoms in detail. They will then be followed throughout their treatment course to evaluate their recovery experience. Detailed accounts of their symptoms and their resolution will be followed.
The study patients will stop being followed when they are either admitted to the hospital or are deemed to be symptom-free. Any other medications prescribed to the patients will also be tracked. Medical histories will be taken and documented to make comparisons at the end of the study. Those patients not requesting ivermectin will also be followed for comparisons at a later date.
What are the study’s two cohorts?
As delineated in the national registry, Dr. Robinson and his wife Dana designed two cohorts, including A) the ivermectin cohort and B) the non-ivermectin cohort.
What are the primary outcome measures?
This study includes two primary outcome measures, including 1) complete recovery from COVID-19 with resolution of symptoms following a 4–6-week timeline per participant and 2) admission to hospital for further treatment within the same 4–6-week timeline per participant. In this latter case, the patient was unable to recover at home and thus needed hospital admission.
********************************************************
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, January 04, 2024
Grand Inquisitor Says Oops
Francis Collins was head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—Anthony Fauci’s parent bureaucracy—during the wreckage caused by the COVID response. Ultimately, Dr. Collins bears a huge measure of the responsibility for the disaster, even if he played the role of the stooge.
It was he who wrote Fauci with the demand for a “quick and devastating takedown” of the Great Barrington Declaration, a statement that merely reasserted traditional public health wisdom in the midst of an insane science experiment being conducted on the whole population.
Five months ago, an organization that seeks political consensus hosted him for some frank talk about what happened. Here is what he had to say:
There is a sense in which he didn’t need to say this at all. We all knew it. They were thinking only about New York City. The rest of the country never had anything approaching a crisis. The government under Collins emptied hospitals out from coast to coast to reserve them for COVID patients who only arrived much later and never came close to overwhelming health care services.
Meanwhile, the entire country was plunged into a grave crisis at every level—a man-made crisis of the worst sort.
Nor did they think about anything other than this one pathogen. It was a wild fanaticism that seized the whole of the ruling class for the better part of two years. None of it made sense but those who objected could hardly get a hearing. Instead, they were smeared, censored, and often fired for non-compliance.
Even as late as December 2021, Collins was still fear-mongering. He told NPR concerning Christmas celebrations:
“We were planning to invite some of the trainees at NIH who are far from home to come for a brunch on Christmas Day at our house if they’re all fully vaccinated and boosted. Still planning to go forward, very carefully, with a small group, and everybody will be wearing masks except when they’re eating.”
Note that Collins doesn’t apologize. He takes no responsibility. He just continues his masquerade as a tennis-shoe wearing, guitar-strumming, Jesus-loving grandpa who is open and broad-minded, never mind that he wielded absolute power over all our lives only a few years ago.
Later in the interview, he is singing hosannas to the glorious vaccines and how perfectly they worked. We are nowhere near approaching the point where people like this tell the truth. It’s almost like they cannot bear it.
Even in this interview, Collins’s nonchalant delivery is infuriating. You want to scream back: you wrecked the lives of hundreds of millions of people! And no one ever gave you the authority to do so!
Meanwhile, it was incredibly obvious to many at the time that disaster would be the only result of lockdowns. The bit about masking was never serious; no one in the know seriously believed these things would protect anyone from a tiny pathogen with an animal reservoir. The only solution was the traditional one from public health wisdom: preserve normalcy, treat the sick with known therapeutics, and alert the vulnerable to stay away from large crowds until the virus becomes endemic.
Collins directly attacked this solution and demanded that government attack it and ultimately censor it!
As we approach the end of the year, we are surrounded by a cultural and economic darkness this generation has never seen before. Most incredibly, public health itself is wrecked.
Let’s just count the ways. Each consequence dates from the beginnings of the lockdowns. That was the turning point, the end of innocence, the great reset, the moment when the choice between freedom and despotism weighed heavily in the most inhumane direction.
Consider:
Homeless people are everywhere at record highs (650K), stemming from rampant mental disorder, substance abuse, and incredibly tight leasing standards stemming from the eviction moratorium.
The middle class can no longer afford to buy a home thanks to high rates from the Fed, deployed in an attempt to mitigate against inflation which is still running hot.
Every merchant has hidden fees in everything, struggling to find some way to hide the hot potato of inflation that has eaten 20-plus percent of the dollar’s purchasing power since 2019.
Shoplifting is a major national problem to the point that thousands of stores have closed.
Shrinkflation affects everything. The groceries have shrunk and the bills have soared—a direct consequence of some $8 trillion in stimulus and money printing.
Office real estate in large cities is approaching an accounting crisis because people are not returning to work, their routines totally shattered by lockdowns.
Travel is uncertain with endless delays and cancellations due to pilot shortages stemming from stay-at-home orders, vaccine mandates, and rampant illness.
The “great reset” is all around us, as we are constantly nudged to drive EVs, live without comforts, buy less meat, and even eat bugs.
A wide-open Southern border has created an immigration crisis as government neglected its core duties in favor of insane methods of virus control.
Restaurants are unaffordable for most people. Dependency on government handouts is 28 percent higher than in 2019. All stores close an hour or two earlier because they cannot get workers to stay later.
The learning losses among the kids are unfathomable, two years and rising, and perhaps an entire generation is lost.
There is a population-wide mental-health crisis in addition to rampant substance abuse.
The federal budget has been blown to smithereens. Political divisions are festering as never before, with neither party willing to discuss the COVID elephant in the room.
Our conception of what it means to live in freedom with a government that knows limits to its power has slipped away.
Arts venues are struggling for dear life to survive. World trade is shattered, with new trading blocs replacing the old ones.
The rise of maniacal gender dysphoria of the young is probably connected with this: endless hours online, loss of confidence in the world as it is, plus loneliness.
One could argue that even the war in Israel and Gaza is a result: security concerns were neglected in favor of microbial activism and shot mandates, and the loss of a moral center to policy then unleashed successive rounds of violence.
Finally, there is the loss of trust in everything: government, public health, pharmaceuticals, academia, science, media, and each other. Society cannot function without trust. Not even churches are immune from broad incredulity since most went along with the COVID response in every detail.
This only begins to scratch the surface of what we’ve lost and what has replaced it. Ultimately all such tragedies come down to individual lives. These days you hear them only among friends and families. And they are terrible stories of sadness and personal despair. The pain is only intensified by the silence on the part of all corporate media, government, and other commanding heights. Because of the news block on the whole topic, there is mass and festering anger beneath the surface.
And yet here is this granddad—the man ostensibly in charge over the whole operation—telling us old war stories of mistakes that were made. Does he have any idea of the carnage he caused? Does he even care?
In Dostoevsky’s version of the Grand Inquisitor, the nemesis predicts: “In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us.”
**********************************************
Australian Court Reverses Millions in COVID-19 Fines
More than $36 million (US$24.5 million) in COVID-19 infringements were withdrawn this year by the New South Wales (NSW) fines commissioner following a landmark Supreme Court ruling.
Thousands of fines were issued by NSW Police to members of the public who allegedly contravened health orders during the pandemic lockdowns in 2020 and 2021.
But in a landmark ruling in November 2022, Justice Dina Yehia said the fines were not valid because they did not include a sufficiently detailed description of the offences.
Following this ruling, the NSW Commissioner of Fines Administration withdrew four types of public health order fines which were similar to the ones examined during the Supreme Court case.
These included unlawfully participating in an outdoor public gathering and failing to comply with the requirement of public health order.
According to the NSW Customer Service department’s annual report, $36.3 million in fines were reversed in 2023 following the commissioner’s decision.
A spokesperson for Revenue NSW said this amounted to about 36,600 fines being withdrawn.
“The decision to withdraw these fines does not mean the offences were not committed, but that the fine notices in question had insufficient descriptions of the offences committed,” the spokesperson said.
As of Nov. 20, around 90 per cent of the withdrawn COVID-19 fines had been refunded and the remaining were in the process of being refunded.
A total of 62,138 COVID-19 related fines were issued by police during the pandemic.
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
***************************************************
Francis Collins was head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—Anthony Fauci’s parent bureaucracy—during the wreckage caused by the COVID response. Ultimately, Dr. Collins bears a huge measure of the responsibility for the disaster, even if he played the role of the stooge.
It was he who wrote Fauci with the demand for a “quick and devastating takedown” of the Great Barrington Declaration, a statement that merely reasserted traditional public health wisdom in the midst of an insane science experiment being conducted on the whole population.
Five months ago, an organization that seeks political consensus hosted him for some frank talk about what happened. Here is what he had to say:
There is a sense in which he didn’t need to say this at all. We all knew it. They were thinking only about New York City. The rest of the country never had anything approaching a crisis. The government under Collins emptied hospitals out from coast to coast to reserve them for COVID patients who only arrived much later and never came close to overwhelming health care services.
Meanwhile, the entire country was plunged into a grave crisis at every level—a man-made crisis of the worst sort.
Nor did they think about anything other than this one pathogen. It was a wild fanaticism that seized the whole of the ruling class for the better part of two years. None of it made sense but those who objected could hardly get a hearing. Instead, they were smeared, censored, and often fired for non-compliance.
Even as late as December 2021, Collins was still fear-mongering. He told NPR concerning Christmas celebrations:
“We were planning to invite some of the trainees at NIH who are far from home to come for a brunch on Christmas Day at our house if they’re all fully vaccinated and boosted. Still planning to go forward, very carefully, with a small group, and everybody will be wearing masks except when they’re eating.”
Note that Collins doesn’t apologize. He takes no responsibility. He just continues his masquerade as a tennis-shoe wearing, guitar-strumming, Jesus-loving grandpa who is open and broad-minded, never mind that he wielded absolute power over all our lives only a few years ago.
Later in the interview, he is singing hosannas to the glorious vaccines and how perfectly they worked. We are nowhere near approaching the point where people like this tell the truth. It’s almost like they cannot bear it.
Even in this interview, Collins’s nonchalant delivery is infuriating. You want to scream back: you wrecked the lives of hundreds of millions of people! And no one ever gave you the authority to do so!
Meanwhile, it was incredibly obvious to many at the time that disaster would be the only result of lockdowns. The bit about masking was never serious; no one in the know seriously believed these things would protect anyone from a tiny pathogen with an animal reservoir. The only solution was the traditional one from public health wisdom: preserve normalcy, treat the sick with known therapeutics, and alert the vulnerable to stay away from large crowds until the virus becomes endemic.
Collins directly attacked this solution and demanded that government attack it and ultimately censor it!
As we approach the end of the year, we are surrounded by a cultural and economic darkness this generation has never seen before. Most incredibly, public health itself is wrecked.
Let’s just count the ways. Each consequence dates from the beginnings of the lockdowns. That was the turning point, the end of innocence, the great reset, the moment when the choice between freedom and despotism weighed heavily in the most inhumane direction.
Consider:
Homeless people are everywhere at record highs (650K), stemming from rampant mental disorder, substance abuse, and incredibly tight leasing standards stemming from the eviction moratorium.
The middle class can no longer afford to buy a home thanks to high rates from the Fed, deployed in an attempt to mitigate against inflation which is still running hot.
Every merchant has hidden fees in everything, struggling to find some way to hide the hot potato of inflation that has eaten 20-plus percent of the dollar’s purchasing power since 2019.
Shoplifting is a major national problem to the point that thousands of stores have closed.
Shrinkflation affects everything. The groceries have shrunk and the bills have soared—a direct consequence of some $8 trillion in stimulus and money printing.
Office real estate in large cities is approaching an accounting crisis because people are not returning to work, their routines totally shattered by lockdowns.
Travel is uncertain with endless delays and cancellations due to pilot shortages stemming from stay-at-home orders, vaccine mandates, and rampant illness.
The “great reset” is all around us, as we are constantly nudged to drive EVs, live without comforts, buy less meat, and even eat bugs.
A wide-open Southern border has created an immigration crisis as government neglected its core duties in favor of insane methods of virus control.
Restaurants are unaffordable for most people. Dependency on government handouts is 28 percent higher than in 2019. All stores close an hour or two earlier because they cannot get workers to stay later.
The learning losses among the kids are unfathomable, two years and rising, and perhaps an entire generation is lost.
There is a population-wide mental-health crisis in addition to rampant substance abuse.
The federal budget has been blown to smithereens. Political divisions are festering as never before, with neither party willing to discuss the COVID elephant in the room.
Our conception of what it means to live in freedom with a government that knows limits to its power has slipped away.
Arts venues are struggling for dear life to survive. World trade is shattered, with new trading blocs replacing the old ones.
The rise of maniacal gender dysphoria of the young is probably connected with this: endless hours online, loss of confidence in the world as it is, plus loneliness.
One could argue that even the war in Israel and Gaza is a result: security concerns were neglected in favor of microbial activism and shot mandates, and the loss of a moral center to policy then unleashed successive rounds of violence.
Finally, there is the loss of trust in everything: government, public health, pharmaceuticals, academia, science, media, and each other. Society cannot function without trust. Not even churches are immune from broad incredulity since most went along with the COVID response in every detail.
This only begins to scratch the surface of what we’ve lost and what has replaced it. Ultimately all such tragedies come down to individual lives. These days you hear them only among friends and families. And they are terrible stories of sadness and personal despair. The pain is only intensified by the silence on the part of all corporate media, government, and other commanding heights. Because of the news block on the whole topic, there is mass and festering anger beneath the surface.
And yet here is this granddad—the man ostensibly in charge over the whole operation—telling us old war stories of mistakes that were made. Does he have any idea of the carnage he caused? Does he even care?
In Dostoevsky’s version of the Grand Inquisitor, the nemesis predicts: “In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us.”
**********************************************
Australian Court Reverses Millions in COVID-19 Fines
More than $36 million (US$24.5 million) in COVID-19 infringements were withdrawn this year by the New South Wales (NSW) fines commissioner following a landmark Supreme Court ruling.
Thousands of fines were issued by NSW Police to members of the public who allegedly contravened health orders during the pandemic lockdowns in 2020 and 2021.
But in a landmark ruling in November 2022, Justice Dina Yehia said the fines were not valid because they did not include a sufficiently detailed description of the offences.
Following this ruling, the NSW Commissioner of Fines Administration withdrew four types of public health order fines which were similar to the ones examined during the Supreme Court case.
These included unlawfully participating in an outdoor public gathering and failing to comply with the requirement of public health order.
According to the NSW Customer Service department’s annual report, $36.3 million in fines were reversed in 2023 following the commissioner’s decision.
A spokesperson for Revenue NSW said this amounted to about 36,600 fines being withdrawn.
“The decision to withdraw these fines does not mean the offences were not committed, but that the fine notices in question had insufficient descriptions of the offences committed,” the spokesperson said.
As of Nov. 20, around 90 per cent of the withdrawn COVID-19 fines had been refunded and the remaining were in the process of being refunded.
A total of 62,138 COVID-19 related fines were issued by police during the pandemic.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/australian-court-reverses-millions-in-covid-19-fines-5555494
********************************************************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, January 03, 2024
Researchers Point to Statistically Significant Autoimmune & Auto-Inflammatory Adverse Event Incidence Post COVID-19 Vax
Mostly small effects but not all
Biomedical researchers from prominent academic research centers in both South Korea and the United States conducted a study identifying 3620 autoimmune-related adverse events among 223.2 million US residents using Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System and the COVID-19 Data Tracker.
Seong-Jan Kim an expert in nuclear medicine from Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital and Sung Ryul Shim, an epidemiological researcher at Konyang University and Yale University-based pharmaco-epidemiologist and mental health investigator Taeho Greg Rhee declare their recent investigation published in the journal Clinical Immunology is the first to quantify the cumulative incidence of autoimmune and auto-inflammatory adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination. This includes an accounting of autoimmune and auto-inflammatory adverse events across six major classes of medical conditions and stratified by age, sex, as well as COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer.
The study involves an accounting of the investigators’ initiative to estimate the cumulative incidence (CIR) of autoimmune and autoinflammatory adverse reactions per 100,000 people fully vaccinated against COVID-19 in the United States.
Study Method
Following STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) reporting guidelines, the authors point out that as publicly available de-identified data was used for the study, it was exempted by the Institutional Review Boards at Konyang University and Yale School of Medicine.
Finding
Tapping into both the U.S. VAERS as well as the CDC Data Tracker databases, the study authors for this investigation report 3620 autoimmune and autoinflammatory adverse events (AEs) across 223,270,498 fully vaccinated individuals in the United States.
A study duration starting upon first administration of the COVID-19 vaccines based on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (December 2020) to September 2022, the reports of AEs by Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen groups
Measuring statistical significance at p<0.05, the following adverse event classes were identified:
Cardiovascular and/or pulmonary events (Pfizer-BioNTech 0.109; Moderna 0.180 and Janssen 0.170); Hematologic events (Pfizr-BioNTech 0.195; Modern 0.283 and Janssen 0.217);
Musculoskeletal events (Pfizer-BioNTech 0.554; Moderna 0.738 and Janssen 9.422) and Other events (Pfizer-BioNTech 0.198; Moderna 0.259 and Janssen 0.211).
*****************************************************
City University of New York & Pfizer Study: COVID-19 Infected, Vaxxed Americans Mostly Reject Pfizer & Merck Antivirals
TrialSite was at the forefront of reporting the boom in use of ivermectin and other off-label regimen such as hydroxychloroquine and even fluvoxamine during the earlier stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most physicians in North America initially learned of the use of ivermectin in research or in COVID-19 care scenarios in low-and middle-income countries as TrialSite chronicled this activity early on in the pandemic.
TrialSite also chronicled the substantial public investment the National Institutes of Health (NIH) made in novel branded pharmaceutical antiviral development during the pandemic, including those developed by Pfizer (Paxlovid) and Merck (molnupiravir). The market was targeted in the several billions per annum given SARS-CoV-2 was to persist—the biomedical research establishments worldwide made the faulty assumption at first that sterilizing vaccines would eradicate viral transmission, leading to herd immunity. When it became clear that this was not the case—that the vaccines would not do a good job of stopping viral transmission and that SARS-CoV-2 would continue to mutate, the antiviral market was considered a winner by pharmaceutical analysts. See “Feds Now See the Need for Funding Antivirals: TrialSite Will Track the Spend, Carefully.”
During the pandemic, what was especially disturbing to both industry and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was a report by TrialSite on an obscure study revealing ivermectin use in America surged from about 3,000 prescriptions per week pre-pandemic to nearly 90,000 prescriptions per week during the height of the pandemic. This kind of data raised the risk of off label generic competition.
An aggressive series of public health programs were unleashed, some terming it propaganda including the FDA’s frontal attack on ivermectin. Ultimately, the FDA lost in a lawsuit by frontline doctors arguing the agency overstepped its mandate. Regardless, Pfizer’s Paxlovid and Merck’s molnupiravir were to be key antiviral medications in the transition from the COVID-19 pandemic to endemic status.
But much like how the market in America has rejected the COVID-19 vaccines at this point, so too are these antivirals routinely for the most part, avoided despite the greenlight from the FDA. In fact, according to a recent study published in Open Forum Infectious Diseases, despite any surges in the number of COVID-19 cases, Americans tended to avoid these products.
In this prospective cohort study involving persons infected with COVID-19 between December 2021 and October 2022, the authors representing the CHASING COVID Cohort Study Team describe the uptake of Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and Molnupiravir (MOV) among a cohort of highly vaccinated adults across America.
Representing the authors is corresponding authors Yanhan Shen, MS, an epidemiologist and biostatistician at City University of New York (CUNY), Institute for Implementation Science in Population Health. Other authors are affiliated with CUNY and Pfizer.
Findings
While overall and not surprisingly, uptake did increase during the study period given surges in underlying COVID-19, overall demand was depressed among the cohort under investigation. This was especially true among African Americans/Blacks and low income Americans.
For example, of those infected, in the study sample of 1,594 only 13.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9% to 15.2%) opted for Pfizer’s Paxlovid. The situation for Merck was far bleaker—out of 1,398 participants only 1.4% of infected individuals opted for MOV (95% CI, 0.8% to 2.1%).
Undoubtedly, due to a confluence of factors including company marketing and government promotion, Paxlovid use grew substantially during the study period. By December 2021 and March 2022, 1.9% of the total subgroup consumed the drug once infected. That percentage surged to 25.3% between August and October 2022. But the data supports the financial data TrialSite reports on Pfizer’s grim COVID-19 vaccine and antiviral sales numbers. See TrialSite “Pfizer Bloodbath? Collapse of COVID-19 Revenues.”
Given that during the entire study period a majority of participants could access antivirals (Paxlovid 85%; MOV 84%), the study team did find that individuals aged 65 and up opted to use the antivirals more than others. For example, among the elderly cohort Paxlovid use was higher at 30.2% (95% CI, 22.2% to 38.2).
Not surprisingly, participants with comorbidities had higher uptake rates as well.
Interestingly, although COVID-19 at least according to some studies impacted African Americans more than Whites and other racial groups, non-Hispanic Black participants opted to mostly stay away from the COVID-19 antivirals (7.2%[95% CI: 2.4%-12.0%]). Also, low-income groups avoided the products relative to other higher income groups (10.6%%[95% CI:7.3%-13.8%]).
What about persons with long COVID versus those without the condition? This cohort was found to take the Paxlovid more frequently (22.0% vs. 7.9%; P=0.001).
Of 216 persons prescribed Paxlovid, 137 (63%[95% CI: 57%-70%]) reported the antiviral as helpful in reducing symptoms.
********************************************************
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
***************************************************
Tuesday, January 02, 2024
A New Report Claims US Medical Officials Knew Covid Vaccines Didn’t Prevent the Spread of Variants of the Disease but Pushed Mandates Anyway
In August of 2021, the former governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, instituted a vaccine mandate for all state healthcare workers. This was followed by former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s mandates for workers in NYC in December of the same year. The federal government announced the idea of Covid vaccine mandates in September of 2021, under the Biden administration COVID-19 action plan.
The dates are important because in July of 2021, TrialSite News reported the widely circulated mRNA vaccines lost efficacy against the then spreading Delta variant of Covid. At the time, the Israeli Health Ministry reported that the delta variant cut the Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine’s strength by 64% in preventing infection. It has just been reported that the Israelis weren’t the only government to know there were problems with vaccine efficacy. Apparently, officials in the United States were also aware of the shortcomings of the mRNA jab.
Emails
An article in the Washington Examiner reveals US government officials were aware of “breakthrough cases” of Covid in January of 2021, when the vaccines became widely available. Emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show the director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Rochelle Walensky and the director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Dr. Francis Collins, were discussing the short comings of the Covid vaccine with breakthrough cases but were pushing vaccine mandates at the same time.
Walensky and Collins also included Dr. Anthony Fauci, then the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) who was also serving as the chief medical advisor to the president. In her emails Walensky says the breakthrough cases are “clearly” an “important area of study”.
Public and Private Statements
In public, however, Walensky issued a different statement. Reportedly, two months after discussing the data with both Fauci and Collins, Walensky said vaccinated people “don’t carry the virus” and “don’t get sick”. Walensky repeated this claim in May of 2021, during a Senate committee hearing claiming fully vaccinated people can’t pass COVID-19 to other people. Unfortunately, for the former head of the CDC, emails now reveal she knew this not to be true.
Mandates Based on Falsehood?
What is disturbing here is the fact that vaccine mandates were pushed, even though the US medical officials in charge knew vaccinated people could contract and spread the virus. People lost jobs over refusal to get the Covid vaccine, and political affiliation was defined by who was vaccinated and who wasn’t. Not to mention those who may have been injured or died due to myocarditis as a result of the Covid vaccine.
The question, of course, is why? The relationship between the US government and big pharma has repeatedly been questioned during the entirety of the pandemic along with the profits made by the pharmaceutical industry. If all of this was, in fact, based on a lie, it’s no wonder the American public has lost faith in the medical industry in the United States.
*****************************************
TrialSite Interviews Medical Justice Minnesota Founder--Seeking to Address Immoral COVID-19 Hospital Protocols
Recently, TrialSite covered the nonprofit advocacy formed based on a growing outrage over what are considered negligent, or even worse protocols for COVID-19 care during the declared national emergency. And the litigation ensues, including a group of Minnesotans now suing local hospital systems called Medical Justice Minnesota. A group formed by a part-time attorney and EMT, experienced firsthand what he and many others consider the outcomes associated with COVID-19 protocols involving remdesivir or procedures such as intubation. Started by Andy Barnhart, the Minnesota-based group seeks to raise charitable contributions, seeking to use such funds to advance legal action that it and others may take on behalf of those injured or killed in Minnesota by pandemic protocols which according to the advocacy group, “Violate the Minnesota Health Care Bill of Rights and generate profits for the wrongdoers.” TrialSite was able to connect with founder Andy Barnhart and learn more about the organization.
What follows is a brief email question and answer so subscribers can learn more about this organization committed to justice for loved ones, including patients and bereaved due to COVID-19 protocols.
How many members are in Medical Justice MN?
As of December 29, 2023, we have 144 members who have reached out to us concerning 84 hospital COVID-19 protocol deaths, the vast majority of which are from Minnesota hospitals.
What COVID-19 protocols does the group believe were most negligent?
We believe that the most negligent aspect of hospital COVID-19 treatment was that it was financially incentivized protocol-driven rather than outcome-driven.
Why do you think these protocols were so off the mark? How did this happen?
We believe the Covid-19 protocols were so off the mark because they drove a financial and administrative wedge between the physician-patient relationship.
How many lawsuits have you filed? Any link to public documents would be greatly appreciated.
We have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Regions Hospital in Saint Paul, MN, on behalf of two widows who each lost their husbands, they believe, due to that hospital’s use of COVID-19 protocols. I do not wish to comment on this case or provide a link to any documents. In 2024 we expect to file additional wrongful death cases against other Minnesota hospitals for their use of COVID-19 protocols including one before the end of January 2024, and another before the end of March 2024 with others to follow.
What are your funding goals?
It is our goal to have all legal fees for these cases paid by Medical Justice MN out of the donations we receive with clients having to pay the legal costs such as filing fees, service of process, expert fees, etc. We are currently bringing in enough donations to allow one attorney and two paralegals to get reimbursed at a discounted rate on a part-time basis.
In order to assess the merit of and take legal action in all the potential Minnesota wrongful death cases we need to raise considerably more money in order to attract more lawyers and paralegals to help. We are a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of Minnesota with a board of directors and officers. We have applied for federal tax-exempt status and our application is pending. Once we receive our exempt status, donations received while our application was pending may be treated as tax-deductible contributions retroactively. However, if our application is not approved, contributions will not be considered tax-deductible.
********************************************************
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, January 01, 2024
MY PICTORIAL HOME PAGE: New edition now up
At the end of every year, I put up a revised version of my pictorial homepge -- with new jokes, new toons and new serious bits. See the latest
Here: https://accessjonjayray.blogspot.com
Backup: http://jonjayray.com/access2023.html
***********************************************
FDA Commissioner Addresses Life Expectancy Decline
Vaccine toxicity? It's the only obvious cause. Vaccine usage is the big change. You need a big cause to explain a big effect
The decline in Americans’ life expectancy has drawn the attention of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Robert Califf, who tweeted on X, “We are facing extraordinary headwinds in our public health with a major decline in life expectancy. The major decline in the U.S. is not just a trend. I’d describe it as catastrophic.”
Reversing Course
Two weeks before the tweet, in remarks to the Association of Professors of Medicine, Califf said “blame is toxic,” but the FDA must examine its level of accountability. Califf gave several ways to reverse course.
Califf proposed his agency “create and sustain a post-market evidence generation system” that would evaluate medical products after FDA approval and “teach about the need for participation in evidence generation.” Califf noted clinicians are under financial pressure not to participate.
Another step to increase life expectancy would be to counter medical “misinformation,” Califf said.
“While vaccination is an obvious example, we could go through the list of leading causes of death and disability and find that misinformation is much more pervasive in the lives of susceptible people and communities than valid, reliable scientific information,” said Califf.
Califf also called for expanding the clinical workforce and wider use of artificial intelligence to “lift clinicians out of box-checking hell.”
‘Vaccine Skepticism and Fatigue’
Better alignment of resources with need might also optimize health outcomes, noted Califf.
“And, as we all know, these poor outcomes are far from uniformly distributed,” said Califf. “Disparities as a function of race, ethnicity, wealth, education and geospatial location are profound and widening. A college degree is associated with an 8.5 year longer life and differences of more than a decade in life expectancy are common when we go from urban areas and university towns to rural areas.”
Califf also recommended increased vaccination but did not mention the adverse reactions connected to the COVID-19 shots. Califf noted new vaccines for COVID-19, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus infections.
“Yet, the combination of vaccine skepticism and fatigue have produced weak vaccination results and parents are seeking exceptions to vaccine requirements for their children in record numbers,” said Califf.
What about Excess Deaths?
Califf does not even pose the obvious question, much less answer it in his remarks, says Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
“The decline in life expectancy is recent and sharp,” said Orient. “Why now? What changed? What are the causes of death? During COVID, there was not a spike in excess deaths. If older, sicker people died of COVID, we should be seeing fewer deaths after the culling effect, not more. Perhaps more fentanyl (overdose deaths), more suicides? How many? Not enough to account for this.”
Califf is ignoring the obvious, wrote Pierre Kory, M.D., and Mary Beth Pfeiffer in The Hill, on December 12. “People are dying in abnormally high numbers even now and long since COVID-19 waned. Yet public health agencies and medical societies are silent,” Kory and Pfeiffer stated.
“Life insurers have been consistently sounding the alarm over these unexpected or, “excess,” deaths, which claimed 158,000 more Americans in the first nine months of 2023 than in the same period in 2019,” wrote Kory and Pfeiffer. “That exceeds America’s combined losses from every war since Vietnam. Congress should urgently work with insurance experts to investigate this troubling trend.”
Dancing Around the Elephant
In researching the increase in excess deaths, researchers should be mindful of the mass COVID vaccination campaign, says Orient.
“Certainly, vaccine status is something you should ask about when collecting all that data,” said Orient. “You’d see a decline in life expectancy if more younger people are dying—as appears to be the case.”
Califf is dancing around an issue that is on most people’s minds, says Orient.
“Which is why they are declining more boosters,” said Orient. “But there may still be delayed effects from earlier shots. There are red-alert levels of safety signals. They are demanding urgent, thorough investigation. Why isn’t Dr. Califf calling for more autopsies, and checking for effects of spike protein or integration of DNA fragments from vaccine production? That a person didn’t go to college is not the reason he died at age 35.”
Evidence-based Medicine
Increasing life expectancy should be a major concern, says Scott Jensen, M.D., a family doctor, and former Minnesota state senator and gubernatorial candidate.
“We see people putting their heads in the sand,” said Jensen. “They don’t want to take blame, but they want to be noble and say it’s catastrophic.”
Jensen says he takes exception to one of Cardiff’s suggestions.
“The phrase ‘evidence-based medicine’ has become similar to ‘follow the science,’ said Jensen. “‘Evidence-based medicine’ is whatever you want it to be. It allows you to pick and choose studies that suit your purpose. But it falls short of the mark. What does it mean and what does it constitute in the practice of medicine?”
The decline in life expectancy should be a primary focus, but the FDA might also examine popular treatments, such as statin drugs, says Jensen.
“There is now data coming out that indicates statin drugs may well be contributing to congestive heart failure,” said Jensen.
FDA’s Image Problem
During the summer, when conservative-leaning media began focusing on excess deaths, the FDA launched a “Rumor Control” webpage to target “the growing spread of rumors, misinformation, and disinformation about science, medicine, and the FDA.”
The problem may go beyond “misinformation,” says Orient.
“The medical establishment has betrayed the people’s trust,” said Orient. “Can they ever get it back?”
COVID Mask Mandates Return Across US Hospitals
Hospitals in places across the United States have reimplemented mask mandates because of what officials say is an uptick in COVID-19 and other respiratory infections.
For example, the NYC Health + Hospitals—officially the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation that operates public hospitals and clinics in New York City—announced that mask mandates will be reimplemented at its hospitals.
“Due to an uptick in respiratory illnesses like COVID-19, flu & RSV in our communities & our hospital, we must return to mandatory masking. Please wear a mask when you visit us!” the hospital operator wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, earlier this week.
The post showed a photo of staff members wearing masks.
A separate NYC Health + Hospitals post states that “mandatory masking” was reinstated at its Jacobi facility in the Bronx because of “the prevalence of COVID-19 in our communities.”
While the hospital and other medical facilities have cited recent U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data showing an increase in COVID-19 cases, historical data from the same agency show that the increase has been relatively small compared to previous years. As of Dec. 16, the agency data show that more than 25,000 people are currently hospitalized for COVID-19 across the United States, whereas on Dec. 16, 2022, more than 36,000 were hospitalized.
Other Mask Mandates
UMass Memorial Medical Center in Worcester, Massachusetts, confirmed to local media that it would issue a monthlong mask requirement for its staff, effective on Jan. 2. Patients and visitors won’t be mandated to wear face coverings, however.
“These changes are expected to remain in effect for approximately one month, at which time they will be reevaluated based on current trends,“ a spokesperson for the hospital said in the statement. ”The health and wellbeing of our patients, visitors, and employees is our top priority.”
The Mass General Brigham health system in Massachusetts also announced that it’s reinstating masking requirements because of COVID-19. “Our masking policies are based on the current respiratory illness rates in our communities,” Mass General Brigham confirmed in a statement to local media on Dec. 28.
In Delaware, TidalHealth announced on Dec. 28 that it’s mandating masks for all hospital visitors in patients’ rooms. That rule was initiated in “an effort to protect the most vulnerable of our population from close contact with persons that may be contagious but not yet have symptoms,” according to the hospital.
Thousands of miles across the country, in Washington state, Kaiser Permanente confirmed to local media that staffers who work in person with patients have to wear masks. Kaiser spokeswoman Linnae Riesen told The Spokesman-Review that masks are required for its workers but that patients and visitors aren’t required to wear them.
“Masks are not required but are strongly recommended for patients and visitors who do not have respiratory symptoms and are visiting low-risk areas of our medical facilities,” Kaiser Permanente’s guidance reads, according to the media outlet.
Officials at Beacon Health System said Memorial Hospital and Elkhart General, located in South Bend, Indiana, are reimplementing masking requirements for visitors, patients, and staff, according to local reports. Earlier this month, several hospitals in Pittsburgh, hospitals in Boston, and UW Health hospitals in Illinois and Wisconsin also implemented mask requirements to varying degrees.
Multiple California counties across the Bay Area region had already imposed a mask mandate for staff; it started in November and will run until the end of spring because of a predicted rise in respiratory illnesses.
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
***************************************************
Vaccine toxicity? It's the only obvious cause. Vaccine usage is the big change. You need a big cause to explain a big effect
The decline in Americans’ life expectancy has drawn the attention of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Robert Califf, who tweeted on X, “We are facing extraordinary headwinds in our public health with a major decline in life expectancy. The major decline in the U.S. is not just a trend. I’d describe it as catastrophic.”
Reversing Course
Two weeks before the tweet, in remarks to the Association of Professors of Medicine, Califf said “blame is toxic,” but the FDA must examine its level of accountability. Califf gave several ways to reverse course.
Califf proposed his agency “create and sustain a post-market evidence generation system” that would evaluate medical products after FDA approval and “teach about the need for participation in evidence generation.” Califf noted clinicians are under financial pressure not to participate.
Another step to increase life expectancy would be to counter medical “misinformation,” Califf said.
“While vaccination is an obvious example, we could go through the list of leading causes of death and disability and find that misinformation is much more pervasive in the lives of susceptible people and communities than valid, reliable scientific information,” said Califf.
Califf also called for expanding the clinical workforce and wider use of artificial intelligence to “lift clinicians out of box-checking hell.”
‘Vaccine Skepticism and Fatigue’
Better alignment of resources with need might also optimize health outcomes, noted Califf.
“And, as we all know, these poor outcomes are far from uniformly distributed,” said Califf. “Disparities as a function of race, ethnicity, wealth, education and geospatial location are profound and widening. A college degree is associated with an 8.5 year longer life and differences of more than a decade in life expectancy are common when we go from urban areas and university towns to rural areas.”
Califf also recommended increased vaccination but did not mention the adverse reactions connected to the COVID-19 shots. Califf noted new vaccines for COVID-19, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus infections.
“Yet, the combination of vaccine skepticism and fatigue have produced weak vaccination results and parents are seeking exceptions to vaccine requirements for their children in record numbers,” said Califf.
What about Excess Deaths?
Califf does not even pose the obvious question, much less answer it in his remarks, says Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
“The decline in life expectancy is recent and sharp,” said Orient. “Why now? What changed? What are the causes of death? During COVID, there was not a spike in excess deaths. If older, sicker people died of COVID, we should be seeing fewer deaths after the culling effect, not more. Perhaps more fentanyl (overdose deaths), more suicides? How many? Not enough to account for this.”
Califf is ignoring the obvious, wrote Pierre Kory, M.D., and Mary Beth Pfeiffer in The Hill, on December 12. “People are dying in abnormally high numbers even now and long since COVID-19 waned. Yet public health agencies and medical societies are silent,” Kory and Pfeiffer stated.
“Life insurers have been consistently sounding the alarm over these unexpected or, “excess,” deaths, which claimed 158,000 more Americans in the first nine months of 2023 than in the same period in 2019,” wrote Kory and Pfeiffer. “That exceeds America’s combined losses from every war since Vietnam. Congress should urgently work with insurance experts to investigate this troubling trend.”
Dancing Around the Elephant
In researching the increase in excess deaths, researchers should be mindful of the mass COVID vaccination campaign, says Orient.
“Certainly, vaccine status is something you should ask about when collecting all that data,” said Orient. “You’d see a decline in life expectancy if more younger people are dying—as appears to be the case.”
Califf is dancing around an issue that is on most people’s minds, says Orient.
“Which is why they are declining more boosters,” said Orient. “But there may still be delayed effects from earlier shots. There are red-alert levels of safety signals. They are demanding urgent, thorough investigation. Why isn’t Dr. Califf calling for more autopsies, and checking for effects of spike protein or integration of DNA fragments from vaccine production? That a person didn’t go to college is not the reason he died at age 35.”
Evidence-based Medicine
Increasing life expectancy should be a major concern, says Scott Jensen, M.D., a family doctor, and former Minnesota state senator and gubernatorial candidate.
“We see people putting their heads in the sand,” said Jensen. “They don’t want to take blame, but they want to be noble and say it’s catastrophic.”
Jensen says he takes exception to one of Cardiff’s suggestions.
“The phrase ‘evidence-based medicine’ has become similar to ‘follow the science,’ said Jensen. “‘Evidence-based medicine’ is whatever you want it to be. It allows you to pick and choose studies that suit your purpose. But it falls short of the mark. What does it mean and what does it constitute in the practice of medicine?”
The decline in life expectancy should be a primary focus, but the FDA might also examine popular treatments, such as statin drugs, says Jensen.
“There is now data coming out that indicates statin drugs may well be contributing to congestive heart failure,” said Jensen.
FDA’s Image Problem
During the summer, when conservative-leaning media began focusing on excess deaths, the FDA launched a “Rumor Control” webpage to target “the growing spread of rumors, misinformation, and disinformation about science, medicine, and the FDA.”
The problem may go beyond “misinformation,” says Orient.
“The medical establishment has betrayed the people’s trust,” said Orient. “Can they ever get it back?”
https://heartlanddailynews.com/2023/12/fda-commissioner-addresses-life-expectancy-decline
**********************************************COVID Mask Mandates Return Across US Hospitals
Hospitals in places across the United States have reimplemented mask mandates because of what officials say is an uptick in COVID-19 and other respiratory infections.
For example, the NYC Health + Hospitals—officially the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation that operates public hospitals and clinics in New York City—announced that mask mandates will be reimplemented at its hospitals.
“Due to an uptick in respiratory illnesses like COVID-19, flu & RSV in our communities & our hospital, we must return to mandatory masking. Please wear a mask when you visit us!” the hospital operator wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, earlier this week.
The post showed a photo of staff members wearing masks.
A separate NYC Health + Hospitals post states that “mandatory masking” was reinstated at its Jacobi facility in the Bronx because of “the prevalence of COVID-19 in our communities.”
While the hospital and other medical facilities have cited recent U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data showing an increase in COVID-19 cases, historical data from the same agency show that the increase has been relatively small compared to previous years. As of Dec. 16, the agency data show that more than 25,000 people are currently hospitalized for COVID-19 across the United States, whereas on Dec. 16, 2022, more than 36,000 were hospitalized.
Other Mask Mandates
UMass Memorial Medical Center in Worcester, Massachusetts, confirmed to local media that it would issue a monthlong mask requirement for its staff, effective on Jan. 2. Patients and visitors won’t be mandated to wear face coverings, however.
“These changes are expected to remain in effect for approximately one month, at which time they will be reevaluated based on current trends,“ a spokesperson for the hospital said in the statement. ”The health and wellbeing of our patients, visitors, and employees is our top priority.”
The Mass General Brigham health system in Massachusetts also announced that it’s reinstating masking requirements because of COVID-19. “Our masking policies are based on the current respiratory illness rates in our communities,” Mass General Brigham confirmed in a statement to local media on Dec. 28.
In Delaware, TidalHealth announced on Dec. 28 that it’s mandating masks for all hospital visitors in patients’ rooms. That rule was initiated in “an effort to protect the most vulnerable of our population from close contact with persons that may be contagious but not yet have symptoms,” according to the hospital.
Thousands of miles across the country, in Washington state, Kaiser Permanente confirmed to local media that staffers who work in person with patients have to wear masks. Kaiser spokeswoman Linnae Riesen told The Spokesman-Review that masks are required for its workers but that patients and visitors aren’t required to wear them.
“Masks are not required but are strongly recommended for patients and visitors who do not have respiratory symptoms and are visiting low-risk areas of our medical facilities,” Kaiser Permanente’s guidance reads, according to the media outlet.
Officials at Beacon Health System said Memorial Hospital and Elkhart General, located in South Bend, Indiana, are reimplementing masking requirements for visitors, patients, and staff, according to local reports. Earlier this month, several hospitals in Pittsburgh, hospitals in Boston, and UW Health hospitals in Illinois and Wisconsin also implemented mask requirements to varying degrees.
Multiple California counties across the Bay Area region had already imposed a mask mandate for staff; it started in November and will run until the end of spring because of a predicted rise in respiratory illnesses.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/covid-mask-mandates-return-across-us-hospitals-5554781
********************************************************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, December 31, 2023
Consent of the Governed, Where Art Thou?
When authority-loving do-gooders run wild
Dr. Robert Malone
I am often asked some form of the question “What caused you to come out of the closet and start criticizing the vaccines?” On a related note, when interviewed by a reporter from the infamous Atlantic August 2021 hit piece, Stan Gromkowski (a former Vical colleague of mine) prophetically opined, “He’s [expletive] up his chances for a Nobel Prize.”
The answer to this persistent question is nicely summarized in the first essay which I wrote in objection to what was being done, titled “COVID Vaccine Deployment under EUA: It’s time we stop and look at what’s going down,” published in Trial Site News on May 30, 2021 (three months before the defamatory Atlantic attack). I guess that article struck a nerve, because it currently has over 19,000 likes; pretty good for an article on a specialty paid site targeting the clinical research industry.
The essay was prompted by a midnight Saturday evening Zoom call with a Canadian physician who was pleading for me to help intervene with the Canadian authorities overseeing the “vaccine” campaign. This specific physician later had his office raided and office computers damaged by the Canadian government for prescribing early treatment and writing vaccine exemptions, and has now being required to submit to the Canadian government re-education and contrition program for his sins if he wishes to retain the ability to practice medicine, just as has been required of Jordan Peterson. But that was all in the future.
Talking until midnight Saturday, he had described what was being done in Canada to force toxic COVID “vaccines” on an unwitting population including children, imploring me to somehow intervene with Health Canada to stop the madness. I told him I did not have the necessary connections, and there was nothing much I could do to help.
Waking early the following Sunday, I realized there was something I actually could do to advance his cause. I could dip into my extensive training in bioethics and write about the fundamental breaches of established biomedical ethics that were going on in Canada, and would soon migrate to the United States, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and across the western “democracies.”
The following is the core of my argument back then (May 2021), which I assert has withstood the test of time much better than the notorious Atlantic hit piece published three months later.
* * *
I believe that adult citizens must be allowed free will, the freedom to choose. This is particularly true in the case of clinical research. These mRNA and recombinant adenovirus vaccine products remain experimental at this time. Furthermore, we are supposed to be doing rigorous, fact-based science and medicine. If rigorous and transparent evaluation of vaccine reactogenicity and treatment-emergent post-vaccination adverse events is not done, we (the public health, clinical research and vaccine developer communities) play right into the hands of anti-vaxxer memes and validate many of their arguments.
The suppression of information, discussion, and outright censorship concerning these current COVID vaccines which are based on gene therapy technologies cast a bad light on the entire vaccine enterprise. It is my opinion that the adult public can handle information and open discussion. Furthermore, we must fully disclose any and all risks associated with these experimental research products.
In this context, the adult public are basically research subjects that are not being required to sign informed consent due to EUA waiver. But that does not mean that they do not deserve the full disclosure of risks that one would normally require in an informed consent document for a clinical trial. And now some national authorities are calling on the deployment of EUA vaccines to adolescents and the young, which by definition are not able to directly provide informed consent to participate in clinical research—written or otherwise.
The key point here is that what is being done by suppressing open disclosure and debate concerning the profile of adverse events associated with these vaccines violates fundamental bioethical principles for clinical research. This goes back to the Geneva convention and the Helsinki declaration.
There must be informed consent for experimentation on human subjects. The human subjects—you, me, and the citizens of these countries—must be informed of risks.As a community, we have already had a discussion and made our decision—we cannot compel prisoners, military recruits, or any other population of humans to participate in a clinical research study. For example, see the Belmont report, which provided the rationale for US federal law Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 46 (subpart A), referred to as “The Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects” (also known as the “Common Rule”).
Quoting from the Belmont Report:
“Informed Consent. — Respect for persons requires that subjects, to the degree that they are capable, be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them. This opportunity is provided when adequate standards for informed consent are satisfied.
While the importance of informed consent is unquestioned, controversy prevails over the nature and possibility of an informed consent. Nonetheless, there is widespread agreement that the consent process can be analyzed as containing three elements: information, comprehension and voluntariness.”
Information, comprehension, and voluntariness. To my eyes, it appears that in many regions public health leadership has stepped over the line and is now violating the bedrock principles which form the foundation upon which the ethics of clinical research are built. I believe that this must stop. We must have transparent public disclosure of risks—in a broad sense—associated with these experimental vaccines. It is either that, or the entire modern bioethical structure which supports human subjects research will have to be re-thought.
* * *
This was not a major intellectual leap. It was a simple restatement of the training in clinical research bioethics which I had received and which had been repeatedly reinforced over the prior decade. No big deal, except that few if any were willing to make such a statement at that time. Long before the infamous Dark Horse or Rogan podcasts.
The failure to disclose the risks of the gene therapy-based COVID vaccines by the U.S. and other “Western” governments became widespread, chronic, and well-documented. Fast forwarding to the present, on Dec. 22, 2023 investigative journalist Greg Piper of the alternative “Just the News” published yet another chapter in the abundant library of documented government withholding of key information concerning COVID genetic “vaccine” harms.
* * *
Misinformation for thee, not me? FDA had similar concerns as COVID vaccine skeptics, docs suggest
FOIA production shows the agency wasn’t impressed by Pfizer’s plan to mitigate “endotoxins,” complained about insufficient cleaning in manufacturing, and had no basis to claim post-vax heart inflammation was rare.
If an outsider raises questions about contamination of COVID-19 vaccines or how closely the Food and Drug Administration monitors for severe adverse events, the agency considers it a boon to misinformation that lowers vaccine uptake and hence kills people.
If the FDA itself raises these issues, that’s a different story ....
The FDA documents, some heavily redacted under the FOIA exemption for trade secrets, show less daylight than may be thought between the agency and critics of federal COVID policy such as Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo.
* * *
Mr. Piper went on to summarize a range of recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and court-ordered document disclosures which clearly demonstrate a systematic and intentional failure by the U.S. government to properly inform the public of the risks associated with accepting gene therapy-based COVID “vaccine” products.
• The CDC had no scientific research to back its public claim in January that people can safely get their COVID, flu, and monkeypox vaccines “at the same time.”
• “Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, didn’t just tell Florida Surgeon General Joe Ladapo last week his concerns about DNA contamination were ‘quite implausible’ but also shamed him for feeding what he considered misinformation that will cause preventable deaths. Yet an Aug. 6, 2021 email to Pfizer from CBER Senior Regulatory Review Officer Mike Smith about ‘endotoxins’—potential contaminants introduced in pharmaceutical manufacturing—shows the feds had similar concerns as they considered full approval for Pfizer’s Comirnaty.”
• “A month before then-acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock told the media that post-vaccination heart inflammation ‘appears to be very low,’ a CBER ‘surveillance’ scientist made clear that the leader was not relying on the agency’s own data. Joyce Obidi reviewed how well CBER’s Sentinel Program, created under a 2007 law to monitor drug safety through electronic healthcare data, could ‘evaluate the serious risk for myocarditis and pericarditis’ following Pfizer COVID vaccination in recipients 16 and older, the first population authorized for emergency use.
‘Post-authorization safety data identified serious risks for myocarditis and pericarditis after COMIRNATY, with increased risk in males under 30 years of age,’ Obidi wrote in the May 18, 2021, memo, which is also buried in the agency’s 246-document public folder on materials related to Comirnaty’s approval.”
• Obidi also stated that “Available data sources in the CBER Sentinel Program are NOT sufficient to identify the outcomes of myocarditis and pericarditis” and not “sufficiently powered to assess the magnitude of risk” for ages 12-30. She wrote. The program would need a minimum of 3-6 months follow-up data to check for “long-term sequelae,” and it cannot study subclinical myocarditis “because of the absence of a definition of subclinical myocarditis and unknown background incidence of troponin abnormalities,” according to Obidi. Sentinel’s data sources at full approval of Comirnaty did not have “sufficient power to assess the magnitude of risk in patients 12-30 years of age” and hence cannot assess the “serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis, and subclinical myocarditis” associated with the vaccine.
• “In another May 18, 2021, memo reviewing Pfizer’s proposed pharmacovigilance plan for its vaccine, Analytic Epidemiology Branch Medical Officer Deborah Thompson evaluated the company’s claim that ‘vaccine-associated enhanced disease’ is just a ‘theoretical risk.’ She cited Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System reports of deaths in ‘fully vaccinated’ patients at that early stage of vaccination. ‘Severe manifestations and death from COVID-19 raise the possibility’ of VAED because it has ‘overlapping clinical manifestations with natural SARS-CoV-2 infection, making it difficult to differentiate VAED from severe’ infection in VAERS reports.”
• Despite assurances otherwise from Peter Marks in his letter to the Florida Surgeon General, major manufacturing process good practices were breached. “In a Form 483 to Pfizer following inspections that uncovered possible or actual product adulteration, FDA investigators made 13 observations about procedures at Pfizer’s Andover, Massachusetts, manufacturing facility. They include “insufficient data to support product quality prior to the release” of vaccine batch FA8057. The observation says “a deviation [redacted] was initiated due to the multiple control limit excursions during [redacted]” and the “affected batch was manufactured with a process that deviated from the validated process parameters” and was “not put on stability until July 22, 2021.” It was released on a redacted date.
An observation on “inadequate quality oversight” implies that Pfizer was late in adding a notation to a batch record that “[redacted] exceeded the allowable [redacted].” The company’s quality assurance does not review “electronic data/reports” from a redacted manufacturing process “during batch record review or prior to batch release.” [Note: No clinical trial I have ever been involved in has been associated with an FDA 483 warning letter. This is no small matter.]
• Just the News asked the FDA prior to publication of this report on Dec. 22 for its characterization of the FOIA-disclosed and related documents in light of Marks’ comments to Ladapo about feeding misinformation. A spokesperson responded two days later, saying the agency was working to provide an answer. As of Dec. 27, the FDA still has not provided a response.
At this point, the burden of publicly available documentation clearly demonstrates multiple examples of intentional breaches of informed consent by both the U.S. government and the pharmaceutical industry manufacturers of these products. It is difficult to dispute that the U.S. government and the pharmaceutical industry sponsors are colluding in a public-private partnership to suppress information concerning risks of these products. Likewise, there has been an agreement between the UK and U.S. governments to suppress disclosure of information concerning risks and adverse events associated with these products.
In a normal, historic regulatory and bioethical environment, this breach of international bioethical norms concerning informed consent would rise to the level of a clear-cut crime against humanity. But in the “through the looking glass” world of COVID post-late 2019, established legal, moral, and ethical norms concerning patient and citizen rights to proper informed consent have all been turned upside down. All of these clear-cut breaches ostensibly being actively “justified” by mockingbird media, the massive censorship-industrial complex, and government officials as being in service of the public interest and the greater good.
The western Five Eyes alliance participants, deferring to the leadership of the U.S. government, are all acting in coordination and cooperation to disregard and hide the implications and consequences of their illegal and unethical actions. This is being justified based on the following oft-repeated catechism, each element of which is demonstrably false or opposed to established Western bioethical consensus:
1. COVID-19, the disease caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2, is highly pathogenic with a case fatality rate of 3.4. [The actual case fatality rate was approximately 0.02 percent when this disease was first “modeled” in 2020 and is much lower now.]
2. The gene therapy-based COVID-19 “vaccines” are safe and effective, are effective as prophylactics, are effective in preventing infection and spread of COVID-19 disease, and if taken by a sufficient fraction of the population [a moving goalpost] can be used to achieve herd immunity. [All of these previous claims are now clearly demonstrated unsupported falsehoods.]
3. The gene therapy-based COVID-19 “vaccines” are effective at preventing severe disease and death from SARS-CoV-2, and have saved 14 million lives. [This 14 million lives saved claim turns out to be based on flawed mathematics, and all cause mortality data analysis indicates something more like 17 million lives lost globally due to the products.]
4. Fully disclosing actual risks, morbidity and mortality data concerning the COVID-19 genetic vaccines will result in “increased vaccine hesitancy” and avoidable harm due to reduced “vaccine” (booster) uptake. [At this point in the outbreak, multiple data sources indicate that acceptance of boosters is associated with “negative effectiveness,” meaning that after a 2-3 month lag period (shorter in some studies) you are more likely to suffer death or severe COVID-19 disease—and other diseases—if you accept injection with these products than if you do not.]
This fourth point is a clear-cut example of flawed logic. Flawed both in terms of the data on morbidity, mortality, and immune imprinting, as well as flawed bioethical reasoning.
Think this through with me. The essence of the statement is essentially the governments’ assertions that “if the public knew about the risks that we know about, then they would choose not to accept those risks based on their assessment of the effectiveness of the product and the clinical risks of infection with the virus. Therefore there would be much more avoidable disease, disability, and death from COVID-19 than would be saved from vaccine products not administered.”
And on the basis of this ill-logic, governments and Pharma are withholding adverse event data, and thereby are unilaterally making medical decisions for sovereign individuals and their children. This is what we have come to. The ultimate embodiment of the nanny state, with corporatist allies. The State knows best, and will withhold medical information from the public which would cause members of that public to question its wisdom and decision-making.
Basically, the State is asserting that it has the right to sentence you to increased risk of death and disease by purchasing (using tax dollars), mandating (vaccines for children program), distributing, enticing, and marketing an injectable product while censoring or defaming (using modern psychological warfare technologies) any and all who disagree or even have the temerity to question the decisions and rights of the State to do so.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/consent-of-the-governed-where-art-thou-5555833
********************************************************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, December 29, 2023
Rescheduling
It is clear that my Fridays have usually become too busy for me to do much blogging. Today, for instance, I spent most of my morning in hospital undergoing a cancer treatment. So henceforth I will not usually post on Fridays. And Saturday is the true Sabbath so I never post then. I usually post on Sunday but this Sunday is New Year's Eve so I might pass then too
Thursday, December 28, 2023
NY Times Reports on a “Possible” Myocarditis Death Due to the Covid Vaccine
Throughout the pandemic, TrialSite News investigated, corroborated and reported on the reported side effects of the Covid vaccine. To support a group that had little to none, the media’s leadership sought out partnerships to be supportive, such as patient advocacy group React19, as well as enabling a censor-free Covid injury support group while also focusing on the incidence of Covid vaccine-related myocarditis in young men.
One example was an Israeli doctor who reported the ailment directly to Pfizer, yet he was ignored. It was only after the doctor had his findings published in The New England Journal of Medicine when the pharmaceutical company finally took notice and realized they might have a problem.
Additionally, TrialSite covered Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson and his concerns on those injured by the vaccine and the hearings Johnson conducted on the vaccine injured as well as physicians who opposed the vaccines and vaccine mandates. Also there have been articles on parents who’ve lost children due to post vaccine heart ailments a celebrity pro-vaccine doctor in Mexico who mysteriously died after getting the shot as well a professional basketball player who claimed, before his death, the Covid vaccine was responsible for his decline. The point is these stories were published and available for reference. But, it seems, one major news outlet has just discovered the story.
The New York Times
In a story published on December 13, The New York Times reported on the death of a 24-year-old man “caught the attention of the movement of vaccine opponents”. The article tells the story of George Watts, Jr. of Elmira, NY, who died a month after his second shot of the Covid vaccine. The medical examiner in nearby Binghamton, NY discovered Watts’ heart muscle, the myocardium, was losing some of its strength and sagging. After examination under a microscope, parts of the heart were inflamed. These symptoms are indications of myocarditis. The article went on to say myocarditis is a slight risk of the mRNA vaccines, but doctors conclude the benefits of the serums outweigh the risks.
Additionally, according to the Times, “There were 224 verified cases of myocarditis among vaccinated children and young adults in the United States from late 2020 to mid-2022, out of the nearly seven million vaccine doses that were administered, according to one study.” And, according to the article, deaths from myocarditis due to the Covid vaccine worldwide are “extremely rare” among the millions of people who’ve been vaccinate. However, the Times does point out the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) changed its guidelines increasing the amount of time males, 12-39 years old should wait between their first and second vaccine dose. The agency increased the time between shots from 3 to 4 weeks to 8 weeks.
NY Times Makes the Story Political
The Times claims after the death of George Watts Jr., anti-vaxxers picked up his story and made it political because the medical examiner blamed the death on the Covid vaccine. According to the article, “Noticing that George Jr.’s story could yield some political influence, a collection of anti-vaccine influencers sought out the Watts family, introducing them to large platforms and even larger goals.” This was especially after George’s father posted the pain of his loss on Facebook. The social media platform then limited how much George Sr. could post. Not an uncommon dynamic, blatant censorship TrialSite reported on frequently.
Other groups came into the picture including Children’s Health Defense, the group founded by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (now an independent presidential candidate growing in popularity) Doctors also came out in support of the vaccine saying the medical examiner may have jumped to a conclusion blaming the death on the Covid jab.
What the article seems to ignore and what has been bought into light is the relationship between Big Pharma and government regulatory agencies like the CDC and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In other countries such as Germany, some groups suspect Covid vaccination deaths have been under counted.
The Times article also ignores groups like the aforementioned React-19, a science-based support group for people who’ve suffered from long term effects of the Covid vaccine.
However, a report is being prepared by the CDC on the death of George Watts, Jr. If the agency agrees with the medical examiner’s report that the cause of death was Covid vaccine myocarditis, it would be a first for the CDC. But, given the relationship between the current White House which bet the house on these vaccines, Big Pharma and the government agency the outcome of the report may not satisfy anyone. Broader state-agency-industry entanglements become larger, more complex and influential.
But a larger question, however, centers on the reality that legitimate reports of myocarditis and vaccine injury have been available since the beginning of the mass countermeasure response to the pandemic. Where has The New York Times been with their reporting? Can they even be considered a legitimate news organization after Covid?
**********************************************
Study looks at association between vitamin C consumption and duration, severity of the common cold
In a study recently published in BMC Public Health, researchers conducted a meta-analysis looking at trials linking vitamin C supplementation and common cold severity and duration.
The use of antibiotics to treat a common cold is common, but futile, as almost all colds are caused by viruses. Yet, results from surveys carried out in the USA found that about half of all common cold patients received antibiotics. Overuse of antibiotics contributes to antibiotic resistance, a significant concern. Given this, alternative treatment options for the common cold have substantial public health relevance. Vitamin C, which has various effects on the immune system, is one such alternative.
The common cold has been associated with temporarily lowered levels of vitamin C levels in the urine, plasma, and leucocytes of infected people.
Despite compelling evidence from randomized control trials and meta-analyses that vitamin C supplementation can reduce the duration and severity of colds, disproportionately influential publications (some of which were subsequently retracted) led to a persistent belief that it is not beneficial.
For the current study, researchers compared the effect of vitamin C on mild symptom duration versus severe symptom duration across trials that reported both effects. The two outcomes of focus were (1) common cold severity in terms of symptoms, duration of severe symptoms, and days spent indoors or absent from work and (2) how long the cold lasted overall.
Trials were included in the analysis if they were placebo-controlled, and a minimum of 1g of vitamin C per day was orally administered over the study period to people who were healthy at baseline.
These criteria allowed researchers to examine how regular supplementation would affect the colds that occurred during the study. The minimum dose was determined by previous findings that indicated a dose-response relationship in that range.
The researchers identified fifteen comparisons from 10 trials which reported both mild and severe symptoms. All trials were randomized and double-blind.
Results indicated that vitamin C supplementation reduced days absent from school (for students) and confined at home by 15%. The groups receiving the supplement also showed decreased common cold severity by 13%.
Across all 15 comparisons, the pooled effect of 1g or more of vitamin C was 15%, indicating a significant reduction in severity.
In terms of the duration of severe symptoms, the analysis found a reduction of 26% as compared to no significant effect of vitamin C supplementation on mild symptoms. There were some indications that effects could be stronger for males compared to females.
The findings strengthen existing evidence of the efficacy of vitamin C in reducing the symptoms of the common cold, particularly in people with severe symptoms. Further research on the therapeutic effects of vitamin C on the common cold should measure outcomes of differing levels of severity, the authors conclude.
********************************************************
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
***************************************************
Tuesday, December 26, 2023
Monday, December 25, 2023
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
