How Moderna Came Up With a Vaccine Against Vaccine Dissent

Finances at the vaccine manufacturer Moderna began to fall almost as quickly as they had risen, as most Americans resisted getting yet another COVID booster shot. The pharmaceutical company, whose pioneering mRNA vaccine had turned it from small startup to biotech giant worth more than $100 billion in just a few years, reported a third-quarter loss last year of $3.6 billion, as most Americans refused to get another COVID booster shot.

In a September call aimed at shoring up investors, Moderna’s then-chief commercial officer, Arpa Garay, attributed some of the hesitancy pummeling Moderna’s numbers to uninformed vaccine skeptics. “Despite some misinformation,” Garay said, COVID-19 still drove significant hospitalizations. “It really is a vaccine that’s relevant across all age groups,” she insisted.

To get past the “misinformation” and convince the public to take continual booster shots, Garay briefly noted that Moderna was “delving down” on ways to partner “across the ecosystem to make sure consumers are educated on the need for the vaccine.”

What Garay hinted at during the call, but didn’t disclose, was that Moderna already had a sprawling media operation in place aimed at identifying and responding to critics of vaccine policy and the drug industry. A series of internal company reports and communications reviewed by RealClearInvestigations (RCI) show that Moderna has worked with former law enforcement and public health officials and a drug industry-funded non-governmental organization called The Public Good Projects (PGP) to confront the “root cause of vaccine hesitancy” by rapidly identifying and “shutting down misinformation.”

Part of this effort includes providing talking points to some 45,000 healthcare professionals “on how to respond when vaccine misinformation goes mainstream.” PGP and Moderna have created a new partnership, called the “Infodemic Training Program,” to prepare health care workers to respond to alleged vaccine-related misinformation.

The company has also used artificial intelligence to monitor millions of global online conversations to shape the contours of vaccine-related discussion. The internal files—shorthanded here as the Moderna Reports—show high-profile vaccine critics were closely monitored, particularly skeptics in independent media, including Michael Shellenberger, Russell Brand, and Alex Berenson. PGP, which was funded by a $1,275,000 donation from the Biotechnology and Innovation Organization, a lobby group representing Pfizer and Moderna, has identified alleged vaccine misinformation and helped facilitate the removal of content from Twitter, among other social media platforms, throughout 2021 and 2022.

Emails from that period show that PGP routinely sent Excel lists of accounts to amplify on Twitter and others to de-platform, including populist voices such as ZeroHedge.

The messages also suggested emerging narratives to remove from the platform. “People opposed to vaccines are capitalizing on the NYT [New York Times] article about the CDC withholding vaccine information. The articles do not contain misinformation themselves but are using the news to further prove the CDC is untrustworthy,” wrote Savannah Knell, PGP’s senior director of partnerships, in an email to a Twitter lobbyist in September 2022. In another email the following month, Kaitlyn Krizanic, PGP’s senior program manager, told Twitter to be on the lookout for “reports that Sweden is no longer recommending the vaccine for children.” In some cases, conservative accounts expressing outrage at restrictive pandemic policies, such as vaccination passports, were deemed by PGP as “misinformation” that warranted removal.

The Moderna Reports consistently show the company raising red flags about those reporting documented side effects of the vaccine the biotech company was selling. Such concerns, which may be typical of corporate public relations efforts that want their product shown in the best light, take on a darker cast when it involves medicine injected into people’s bodies.

Like the Twitter Files, the Moderna Reports highlight the push by powerful entities—especially government, Big Tech, and Big Pharma—to identify and brand dissenting opinions about establishment narratives as risky forms of speech. The growing network these efforts rely on shows the growth of what has been called the censorship industrial complex. Moderna’s faltering financials also suggest, at least for now, the limits of that project.

Public Good Projects and Moderna did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

In an internal email sent last July, Moderna notified its team of its latest efforts to shape the vaccine debate. “We have partnered with PGP (The Public Good Projects) and Moderna’s Global Intelligence, Corporate Security, Medical Affairs, Corporate Communications, Clinical Safety and Pharmacovigilance teams to provide media monitoring for misinformation at scale,” Marcy Rudowitz, the company’s customer program lead, wrote. “If and when a response is needed, our team will notify the appropriate stakeholders with recommendations,” she added.

The extent to which the company may intervene to shape content decisions is not clear. PGP continues to boast close relations with establishment institutions, including major medical associations.

The rise of censorship is inextricably connected to the pandemic, which emerged in the United States in early 2020. As federal, state, and local governments imposed unprecedented regulations on Americans in the name of public health, efforts arose to discredit counter-narratives that could be spread easily on social media. Early in the pandemic, criticism of policies such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates came almost entirely from independent media, which faced shadowbans and outright censorship on various platforms.

When they introduced their vaccines in 2021, manufacturers such as Moderna, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson also had a powerful financial interest in bolstering such censorship.

Moderna, perhaps more than other drug firms, is overwhelmingly reliant on the continued success of its vaccine. The company announced a price hike of up to $130 a dose this month, far higher than the $15–26 for American federal contracts, according to the Wall Street Journal. “We’re expecting a 90 percent reduction in demand,” Modena CEO Stéphane Bancel said, when he was asked to defend the decision. “As you can see, we’re losing economies of scale.”

Far from acting as a neutral arbiter, the Moderna Reports show that the company blurred the lines between public relations and public health. In many cases, Moderna’s intelligence and communications team targeted accurate information that had “the potential to fuel vaccine hesitancy” as menacing forms of misinformation in its reports. Given the size and scope and the censorship industrial complex, it can be difficult to draw a clear straight line between Moderna’s surveillance and actions taken against specific articles, posts, and writers. Instead, as Garay suggested, the company is one stream in an evolving ecosystem aimed at undermining dissent.

Alex Berenson

Independent journalist Alex Berenson is a repeated subject of the company’s surveillance efforts. A former reporter for the New York Times, Berenson quickly emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of vaccine-related policies. He was among the earliest to cast doubt on the Biden administration’s false claim that the vaccinated people could not transmit the COVID-19 virus to others. After government pressure on Twitter, Berenson was banned from the platform in 2021, only to return after successfully litigating against the company.

He appears to still be in the crosshairs. In September 2023, Moderna flagged a tweet from Berenson that highlighted the CDC’s data showing that among 1 million mRNA-vaccinated teenagers, there were from zero to a single COVID death and up to 200,000 side effects.

The company cited Berenson’s tweet under a report headline “Attacks on pediatric COVID-19 vaccines escalate” and claimed he had “cherry-picked data.” However, the company did not directly rebut any of Berenson’s claims in its report. Rather, Moderna noted the “high-risk” danger of Berenson’s viral tweet related to the potential for low child COVID-19 vaccination rates. “Fears about side effects and long-term dangers are major reasons parents report not vaccinating their children,” the report stated. It further concluded that “resistance to COVID-19 vaccines for children can be a gateway to broader anti-vaccine beliefs.”

Other Moderna reports flag Berenson’s tweets for “misinformation about mRNA safety” and claim that he is a “conspiracy theorist” for suggesting that health authorities have not properly taken into account the documented risks of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) for young men receiving the vaccine. Such questions have been posed by an increasing number of health professionals, but the misinformation reports dismiss any Berenson criticism as inherently false.

“It’s nice to know Moderna is watching me,” said Berenson, when asked about his response to the revelations. “I’m watching them too. mRNA shots carry unacceptably high heart risks for teenagers and young adults. Nearly the entire rest of the world accepts this reality and now discourages or bans people under 50 from taking mRNA Covid boosters. It is unconscionable that Moderna and Pfizer continue to market them to non-elderly adults.”

“They can call me whatever they like,” he noted, “but they can’t stop my reporting.”

Russell Brand

Russell Brand, the British commentator and comedian, is also a repeated name in the Moderna misinformation files. The left-leaning populist routinely pillories the pharmaceutical industry for exploiting the pandemic to generate unprecedented profits.
Moderna has closely monitored Brand’s criticism of the drug industry.

In various “low-risk” reports produced in August 2023, Moderna flagged videos produced by Brand twice. In one, Moderna noted that Brand had broadcast a monologue about Jonathan Van-Tam, a former senior health official who helped formulate COVID-19 policies in Britain. Van-Tam had just taken a position with Moderna, a move that raised eyebrows with many in the press. In the video, Brand noted that the company had just “made a fortune during the pandemic selling vaccines to the government,” and that the “government worker that bought all those vaccines” was now moving through the revolving door.

In another report, Moderna alleged that Brand “claimed that COVID-19 vaccine mandates were based on a lie in a recent podcast episode.” The video was broadly accurate. The monologue highlights CDC documents that had come to light showing that officials were aware that the virus would “break through” and still infect vaccinated patients. In an ironic twist, Brand finished the segment with a discussion of efforts to censor debate around the vaccine.

Moderna noted they were not yet taking action on this broadcast, but “we are monitoring with our partner, the Public Good Projects.”

The following month, several media outlets reported that several women who insisted on anonymity were claiming that Brand had abused them nearly twenty years ago. The ensuing media firestorm, which led to YouTube demonetizing his account, became fodder for other Moderna misinformation reports. The company warned that the cancellation of Brand was sparking a backlash among social media users, who believed that he may be targeted by government and corporate censors for his outspoken opposition to pandemic narratives.

In a Moderna high-risk report, the company noted that speculation was swirling that “allegations are part of a conspiracy to silence the comedian, who has been a vocal opponent of COVID-19 vaccines.” The report linked an X video of Brand sharply criticizing Moderna and Pfizer for generating “$1,000 of profit every second” in 2021. The specific claim of profiteering was a mainstream claim, a statistic that was produced by Oxfam.

Nowhere in its reports on Brand did Moderna highlight any incorrect information. But the reports noted that they monitored Brand because he “has a large platform with over 6.6 million YouTube subscribers and over 21 million followers across multiple social media platforms.” Moreover, his “videos are widely circulated in anti-vaccine spaces where he is viewed as a truth-teller and threat to authority,” and that Brand maintained support from Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk.

Michael Shellenberger

The Moderna misinformation reporting system reveals that the pharmaceutical firm maintained an interest in pandemic-related issues that go beyond vaccine policy, overlapping with general issues surrounding the unexplained questions that still swirl around the source of the pandemic.

The company, for instance, flagged discussions around news last year of a congressional whistleblower who came forward with allegations that the CIA suppressed an assessment from analysts that COVID-19 originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The story has garnered widespread coverage in NBC, Science, and ABC News, among other outlets.

But Moderna’s misinformation alerts flagged Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and journalist Michael Shellenberger for distributing information about the CIA allegation. Shellenberger—with whom this reporter has worked on the Twitter Files—had exclusively reported earlier last year that U.S. government sources believed that the “patient zeros” of COVID-19 were a group of Chinese scientists at the Wuhan lab—a major revelation later confirmed by the Wall Street Journal.

Despite his work on the issue, Moderna dismisses Shellenberger in its reports as among its known “misinformation authors.”

“Moderna has spent years spreading disinformation about their vaccines and so it makes sense that they would smear the scientists and journalists who expose them as conspiracy theorists and sources of misinformation,” Shellenberger told RCI.

“The question is why is Moderna spreading disinformation on the high probability that Covid escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab?” he added. “A company that makes its money selling a coronavirus vaccine shouldn’t care where Covid came from.”

More here:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/how-moderna-came-up-with-a-vaccine-against-vaccine-dissent-5567090?ea_src=au-frontpage&ea_med=opinion-5

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

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

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

DNA Contaminants in COVID Vaccines Are ‘Beyond the Pale’: Florida Surgeon General Explains the Call for Vaccine Halt

On Jan. 3, the office of Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo issued a statement calling for the halt in the use of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, citing the recent discovery of DNA contaminants in the vaccine vials.

On the Jan. 12 episode of EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders,“ Dr. Ladapo explained why he called for a halt, saying that while there are also safety concerns with the COVID mRNA vaccines linking them to a multitude of adverse events, the recent discovery is ”beyond the pale.”
“DNA is a common contaminant of many biological products,” he told the show’s host, Jan Jekielek. “We can use DNA to produce different drugs like insulin, other biologics—and that’s a wonderful innovation, and normally, that DNA doesn’t pose a problem.”

Human cells are resistant to DNA entry, and this prevents harming the integrity of the cell’s DNA.

However, since the mRNA vaccines use lipid nanoparticles, which deliver mRNA into the cells directly, DNA contaminants could also be able to enter the cells. Some scientists, like Dr. Ladapo, are concerned that the DNA from the vaccine may integrate with the human genome.

Prominent officials at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) disagree.

On Dec. 6, Dr. Ladapo sent a letter to FDA commissioner Dr. Robert Califf and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director, Dr. Mandy Cohen. In his letter, he asked if there have been risk assessments of the vaccine DNA integrating into human DNA, especially regarding the controversial SV40 promoter/enhancer region found in Pfizer’s vaccine.

Other questions included whether risk assessments have been done on DNA integration in reproductive cells and if the current levels of DNA residuals are acceptable under the FDA’s standards.

“We’ve gotten ... lengthy responses that don’t answer the question,” Dr. Ladapo said.

In his response, Dr. Marks wrote that DNA integration “is quite implausible,” adding that animal studies show “no evidence indicative for genotoxicity.”
No tests were mentioned that would assess if DNA integration is occurring.

Dr. Ladapo believes it would be reckless not to test for DNA integration, a potential risk once DNA enters the cell.

“Their position is, oh, no, it’s fine. Everything’s fine; safe and effective. That’s not only not good enough, but it’s completely unacceptable,” Dr. Ladapo said. “And that’s why I made that determination, and it’s absolutely the correct call.”

DNA Contamination: The SV40 Promoter Controversy

Both Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines contain DNA contaminants, but only the Pfizer vaccines have also been found to contain SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA, which has since become a topic of debate.
SV40, or simian vacuolating virus 40, is a DNA virus that sometimes causes cancer in animals.

However, the SV40 promoter/enhancer found in the vaccines is only a tiny section of the DNA; it is not equivalent to the entire SV40 virus or its protein.

Promoter-enhancers are sections of DNA that can control the activity of other DNA.

“With DNA, there are different regions that tell other parts of DNA whether to be active or not,” Dr. Ladapo said. “This type of control process is very important ... The absence of control can, for example, lead to cancer ... [and] other metabolic abnormalities.”

In his letter to the FDA, Dr. Ladapo asked about the additional risk of the SV40 promoter/enhancer region’s DNA integration.

Dr. Marks answered that there were no genes for SV40 proteins nor SV40 proteins themselves present in the vaccine.

But Dr. Ladapo believes Dr. Marks is intentionally not answering the question. “No one’s talking about SV40 protein ... we talked about the promoter/enhancer region. They have to be doing it intentionally,” Dr. Ladapo said.

The Risks of DNA Integration

It is currently unknown whether DNA introduced into the body is being integrated into the cell’s human genome; and if it’s integrated, what impact will it have.

Only around 1 percent of the human DNA produces protein; the job of the other 99 percent of DNA is mostly unknown.

“There’s ... a lot of uncertainty about our genome—what it does, how it supports life and creates life, and creates the miracle of each individual human being,” Dr. Ladapo said. “What we do understand is that some of the potential risks of DNA integration include development of cancers, because ... of the regulation of different aspects of DNA and cell growth.

“Other possibilities include the disruption of the normal expression of some proteins, which then subsequently could lead to disruption of normal human function.”

Since biodistribution studies in rats have shown that the mRNA vaccines can accumulate in the reproductive organs, Dr. Ladapo’s letter expressed concern that there may also be DNA integration of reproductive cells.

“We are the most complex beings—the most complex machines, if you will—living machines that exist on this Earth. So I do believe that our genome is part of our connection to God. So that is to say that there’s quite a lot at risk in terms of not taking proper precautions and sensible precautions, with maintaining the integrity to the best that we can—life ain’t perfect, but to the best that we can with our human genome.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/dna-contaminants-in-covid-vaccines-are-beyond-the-pale-florida-surgeon-general-explains-the-call-for-vaccine-halt-5566113?ea_src=ai_recommender&ea_med=desktop_health

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

FDA Launches Fresh Bid to Toss Out High-Profile Ivermectin Case

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is seeking to persuade a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit challenging its repeated advisories against using ivermectin to treat COVID-19.

The FDA in a sealed motion asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas to dismiss the suit, which was brought by three doctors who allege the FDA’s warnings were illegal.

The late 2023 motion was sealed because exhibits the government cited “include confidential information” from a separate legal proceeding, according to a government brief.

Government lawyers said they would file redacted versions of the motion for public perusal but still haven’t done so.

Attorneys for the doctors said on Jan. 12 that the court should reject the government’s fresh bid to throw out the case.
“The FDA exceeded its authority by repeatedly issuing public directives not to use ivermectin for COVID-19, even though the drug remains fully approved for human use,” they wrote.

The government motion came after an appeals court found that the FDA likely overstepped its authority with the warnings.
“FDA can inform, but it has identified no authority allowing it to recommend consumers ’stop' taking medicine,” U.S. Circuit Judge Don Willett, an appointee of then-President Donald Trump, wrote in the ruling.

The appeals court remanded the case back to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, who said in 2022 that the doctors failed to prove their allegations.
The FDA in the sealed motion asked Judge Brown, another appointee of President Trump, to dismiss the case.

According to lawyers for the doctors, the FDA’s motion includes the argument that the plaintiffs haven’t suffered injuries that are traceable to the FDA and that can’t be remedied by a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs.

“The FDA is wrong,” the lawyers said. “Plaintiffs have suffered interference with their practice of medicine and the doctor-patient relationship, economic harm, reputational harm, and increased exposure to malpractice liability, and have been subject to disciplinary proceedings and forced resignations, all of which clearly trace to the FDA’s campaign against ivermectin and would be remedied by equitable relief.”

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act enables the FDA to authorize or approve drugs for a specific use, but doctors are free to prescribe cleared drugs for other purposes, in what’s known as “off-label” prescribing. The law doesn’t grant authority to the FDA to regulate off-label use.

The plaintiffs include Dr. Robert Apter, who was investigated by medical boards in two states for prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID-19. The referrals to the boards include some of the FDA’s warnings against using the drug as a COVID-19 treatment.

The FDA’s position in seeking a dismissal stems in part from the negative actions against the plaintiffs being taken by third parties such as pharmacies, according to a description of the sealed motion. It was quoted as saying that the referrals “are not fairly traceable” to the FDA’s statements.

An exhibit included by the FDA, however, showed that one of the referrals came from a pharmacist who cited FDA documents as a reason for “increased scrutiny” with regard to ivermectin prescriptions. The pharmacist wrote that Dr. Apter wouldn’t provide a “valid medical reason” for the ivermectin prescription and was thus engaging in “inappropriate prescribing.”

“The FDA is the common thread through all of [the] plaintiffs’ injuries, which began only after the FDA embarked on its campaign to stop the use of ivermectin for COVID-19 and which often involve explicit invocation of the FDA’s directives and recommendations,” the plaintiffs’ lawyers said.

They are seeking an order that would force the FDA to rescind or amend its warnings. That would remove the justification of the parties that have taken actions against the plaintiffs, the lawyers added.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/fda-launches-fresh-bid-to-toss-out-high-profile-ivermectin-case-5566009

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

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

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

Nurses Share Experiences In Hospitals During COVID-19--Incredibly Disturbing If Accurate & Generalizable to Broader Health System

An early internet marketing pioneer now retired, during the COVID-19 pandemic became one of what has become a small army of dedicated citizen journalists seeking to dig deeper, uncover and expose, and importantly, address what many believe to have been an unacceptable state overreach severely damaging the American economy and society. For Ken McCarthy this pursuit for truth came in the form of a series of hard-hitting interviews with experienced nurses. Based on recurring themes emerging from these interviews, McCarthy identifies a shocking potential reality: the top-down protocols promulgated across American health care systems contributed to the enormous U.S. COVID-19 related death toll.

During the spring of 2020 McCarthy started interviewing seasoned nurses working in hospital ICUs treating COVID patients. He questioned these providers about the reasonableness, efficacy, and safety of government-recommended and hospital-enforced COVID protocols. What he learned would profoundly shake him to the core.

Actually, McCarthy was not alone in investigating hospital COVID-19 protocols. Already some nurses and physicians resigned, at times in protest over what they deemed a violation of the Hippocratic Oath.

Mostly censors continuously eradicated any such talk materializing on social media channels, while the mainstream media of course mostly avoided such journalism all together. But there was some flare up of interest in select media, with some coverage and even chatter online that would eventually be scrubbed.

A Pioneer

Ken McCarthy literally helped mature the commercial capacity of the internet during the first part of the 1990s, as a marketer conducting experimentation to help develop pay-per-click advertising for example, as well as early attempts to establish monetization of online videos.

Suffice to say McCarthy did well for himself financially which later in life would come in handy for his career out of retirement: COVID-19 sleuth with a particular focus on hospital protocols.

What started as a deep concern, translated into a pursuit of journalism with a series of in-depth interviews of experienced nurses and other credentialed health care professionals. The topic: their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Does McCarthy’s nurse interview-sourced discovery fit into an ongoing thesis as to why so many people died in the United States during the pandemic?

With 1,191,815 deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the United States, mortality was higher, far higher, than any other nation. But how could this be? The world’s richest economy with over $4 trillion spent annually on health care! And apparently more fortunes were spent during the pandemic as the federal government incentivized hospitals and health systems, not surprisingly, accompanied by top-down protocols of care. Then of course the entire countermeasure value chain, all protected with near universal liability assumption by the government.

After several in depth interviews McCarthy wasn’t sure any more about the official narrative pertaining to the causes for COVID-19 death. This led to the book titled What the Nurses Saw.

McCarthy connected with TrialSite founder Daniel O’Connor to discuss his book, a summary of findings and his point of view as to any underlying rationale or reasons.

McCarthy shared that he first started the nurse interviews in the late spring of 2020 during the first surge of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. However, for at least a while he put the matter aside, but revisited the topic three years later when it became obvious that no one else was going to.

The nurses point of view during the pandemic most certainly seems quite important. Often silenced with no voice in their place of employment, also out in the medical freedom community the nurse voice was often silenced by the prominent critical doctors gaining and keeping the spotlight,

TrialSite’s O’Connor mentioned “We thought it was important, given that Ken McCarthy worked tirelessly investing in his own budget to capture and share the voices of highly experienced nurses and their points of view as to what happened.”

The book includes in-depth interviews with eight veteran nurses from the U.S., one from the UK, and two from Canada plus a veteran respiratory therapist with 23 years of clinical experience. Their consistent narratives raise alarm and suggest that in addition to all the other problems COVID-19 caused, that possibly the U.S. government led response also precipitated a collapse of medical practice, ethical standards, and common sense that may have been the cause or a major contributing factor to what is a currently uncounted number of iatrogenic deaths and injuries.

Meaning that potentially thousands if not tens of thousands or more deaths were possibly linked to COVID-19 protocols for example aggressive intubation and ventilation, overuse of remdesivir and the like.

The author was even told of hospitals that did not allow providers to treat hospitalized COVID-19 patients with ibuprofen or steroids to reduce inflammation. Some of the nurses also reported that their specific employer was incentivized based on duration of stay, use of remdesivir and other activities.

Need for Serious Inquiries

Although the book is based on anecdotal evidence, nonetheless the interview topics, the observations and allegations are based on direct nurse testimonials.

While not a medical professional, McCarthy studied science in undergraduate and went on to a very successful career as mentioned above. Over the years he advocated for using the internet to publish, as well as a tool for challenged communities where he developed strategies to use the internet to organize citizens and engage in education, outreach and community empowerment.

An environmentalist as well, McCarthy’s community organizing helped to defeat what was planned to be along the Hudson River North America’s largest coal-fired cement plant.

Combining his technical -minded skills with citizen journalism , publishing and community activist McCarthy’s now on a mission to understand any hospital culpability during the pandemic. According to his interview subjects, various hospitals became dangerous places during COVID-19, not just due to the novel coronavirus, but because of the unprecedented transformation of medicine.

The ultimate culprit? The author informed TrialSite’s Daniel O’Connor that he suspects the federal government’s hand, via the emergency apparatus triggered by the announcement of federal health emergencies.

TrialSite plans on a video interview with the author and will support him in various research endeavors. For example, a nagging question: were the same intubation and ventilation protocols the standard for previous respiratory ailments involving acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)? What about for the first two coronavirus surges—SARS-CoV and MERS?

If the protocols were not the same, meaning new standards of care suddenly appeared with SARS-CoV-2, why would the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, part of the U.S. Health and Human Services offer more payments for such deviations to existing practices? What was the rationale?

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/nurses-share-experiences-in-hospitals-during-covid-19-incredibly-disturbing-if-accurate-generalizable-to-broader-health-system-e5b63deb

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

Australia: Pregnant nurse Ella refused to get a Covid jab and was duly sacked from her job at a children's hospital. Now she's plotting revenge

A passionate nurse is threatening legal action after she was sacked this week for refusing to get a Covid jab in 2021 - even though the mandate for healthcare workers was repealed in September 2023.

Ella Leach, 29, secretary of the Nurses Professional Association QLD, sued Queensland Health for her 'unfair dismissal' last weekend.

The seven-months pregnant mum-to-be is also demanding an apology from Industrial Relations Minister Grace Grace for making 'misleading' comments about her case.

Ms Leach claims that by firing more than 1,200 nurses in a similar position, the state's government is 'just trying to prove a point' in the middle of a health care worker shortage.

'Terminating experienced nurses in a critical workforce shortage after keeping them in limbo for over two years, which to all appearances seems to be a power play… .I don't think, passes the pub test,' she told Daily Mail Australia.

'This is not about me. This is about thousands of healthcare workers prevented from working in their profession.'

Ms Grace had said there had been 'specific circumstances' behind Ms Leach's firing when she was asked about the decision to sack her.

According to Ms Leach however, the only allegation listed in her termination letter regarded her refusal to comply with the vaccine mandate.

'Ms Grace has my permission to elaborate further about the 'specific circumstances' surrounding my case,' she told the Courier Mail.

'Considering another pregnant nurse was sacked from Queensland Health two days after myself, I know that this is not an isolated incident.'

The Minister had previously said that 'there was more' to Ms Leach's case than met the eye, but that she was unable to disclose any extra details due to privacy concerns.

'It's very hard to comment on an individual case, but I think there's more to this case in relation to this,' Ms Grace said.

'We are doing all that we can to attract health workers but quite clearly, when directions are given, we expect them to be followed.'

In a letter replying to the Minister, Ms Leach wrote that she had 'relinquished any right to privacy' and was 'eager' to hear the circumstances that Ms Grace was referring to.

'I am yet to receive any further information ... beyond what was espoused in my termination letter,' Ms Leach wrote.

'Otherwise, I would like to receive an apology from you for portraying my circumstances of dismissal as anything other than what they were - a pregnant Queensland Health nurse being dismissed for disobeying a Health Employment Directive that is no longer in force.'

Queensland's hospital system has been plagued since the pandemic by long waiting times and ambulance ramping.

Ms Leach believes this is almost entirely due to a chronic lack of staffing.

'Nurses are pushed to the point of burn out, women are unable to give birth in our rural facilities and forced to have caesarians far from home - and all exacerbated by the fact that we don’t have enough nurses and midwives in our healthcare facilities.'

Daily Mail Australia has contacted Ms Grace's office and Queensland Health for comment.

Ms Leach worked as a registered nurse for seven years and had experience in neurosurgical, neurology, orthopaedics, medical and oncology.

Prior to the pandemic she had never been subject to disciplinary processes or management intervention.

Speaking to Sky News Australia on Tuesday, Ms Leach said that the drama had taken her attention away from her pregnancy.

'I should be focused on the joys of becoming a first time mum but it has been overshadowed by this whole process,' she said.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12950669/Covid-vaccination-nurse-sue-Queensland-Health-sacked-revenge.html

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

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CDC Ordered to Disclose Crucial Information From COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance System

The top U.S. public health agency must disclose information provided by people who experienced problems following COVID-19 vaccination, a federal court has ruled.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is being ordered to produce 7.8 million free-text entries from V-safe, one of its vaccine surveillance systems.

Data from the system released under court order in 2022 showed that 25 percent of V-safe participants missed school, work, or other normal activities due to post-vaccination issues, and nearly 8 percent of participants reported seeking medical attention, such as hospitalization after receiving a shot. That data, from boxes checked by users, came through an order in a case that started as a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
But the CDC resisted releasing the free-text entries, arguing that many of them include information that should remain private.

“CDC determined that many of these responses contain personally identifiable information, the disclosure of which would publicly link participants to highly sensitive health information,” government lawyers representing the agency said in one brief. “And because it would take tens of thousands of workhours to manually review and redact millions of free-text responses, CDC determined that segregating the non-exempt information within these responses would be unreasonably burdensome and was therefore beyond its FOIA obligations.”

The CDC said it would take one worker 59 years to complete the work if it were ordered.

The government’s arguments were rejected by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, in response to a fresh lawsuit.

“While the burden to produce the requested free-text responses may be heavy, this court does not find that it is unreasonable,” he said in the new ruling.

The CDC can go through the records and redact personally identifiable information as allowed by FOIA but must do the work and produce the records with the redactions, he added later. Evidence produced in the case indicates that about 93 percent of the records will require no redactions.

The materials will be important for people who experienced problems following vaccination, the judge said.

“Production of the free-text data will permit independent researchers to put the government agencies to their proof by considering all of the available data,” he said. He noted that CDC studies on v-safe data only covered data from the first week or two after vaccination but that the surveys collected data for up to one year after receipt of a shot.

The CDC must produce at least 390,000 free-text entries by Feb. 15. Freedom Coalition of Doctors for Choice, which brought the case in 2023, said the entries would be posted to its website.

The CDC did not respond to a request for comment.

V-safe is a system run by the CDC. Introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, it features people inputting information through a phone application. Participants are asked to provide basic information such as their name and check boxes that answer various questions, such as whether they missed school or work after vaccination. They can add additional information in a free-text area.

The portion where participants checked boxes did not include many adverse events the CDC thought the COVID-19 vaccines might end up causing, according to previously released documents.
Lawyers say the free-text entries will provide crucial details on those health issues and others.

The Informed Consent Action Network, which brought the case that resulted in the disclosure of some of the V-safe data, obtained a free-text entry from a V-safe user that showed her writing, at one point, “Help me!” She said she suffered from a number of symptoms, including nausea and vomiting, and went to the emergency department. Six months later, she wrote, “Still no response from CDC, no help from public health.”
“This ruling,” the network said in a statement, “sends a clear message to our federal agencies: we are not moving on and forgetting about the pandemic or the actions they took.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/cdc-ordered-to-disclose-crucial-information-from-covid-19-vaccine-surveillance-system-5564082?ea_src=au-frontpage&ea_med=us-politics-left-medium-0

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

Nurses in Queensland who were stood down during the pandemic for refusing to get a Covid vaccine are being sacked despite the lifting of mandates

Nurses in Queensland who were stood down during the pandemic for refusing to get a Covid vaccine are being sacked despite the lifting of mandates months ago.

Ella Leach, secretary of the Nurses Professional Association QLD, was one of those who was recently notified through a letter she had been fired, even though she is seven months pregnant.

'I should be focused on the joys of becoming a first time mum but it has been overshadowed by this whole process,' Ms Leach told Sky News Australia.

When asked why the Queensland Health Department would continue pursuing employees who are no longer in breach of any vaccine rule, Ms Leach said she felt the authority was 'doubling down' on its position during the pandemic.

In September 2021 all Queensland Health staff working in facilities where healthcare was provided were told they must be vaccinated for Covid, however, this directive was repealed in September 2023 by new director-general Michael Walsh.

'They're just trying to prove a point with us,' Ms Leach said. 'There's no sensible reason why they would continue with this action.'

'We know that our hospitals are screaming out for staff. We're seeing ambulances ramped outside hospitals, people dying in ambulances, our rural areas are suffering.'

Ms Leach said she was one of at least 50 staff she knew of that had been fired since September 25 last year.

Ms Leach's former employer Children's Health Queensland said in a statement it is 'unable to comment publicly on the employment situation, including disciplinary action, of individual staff'.

'Employee disciplinary matters are handled on a case by case basis and governed by robust and equitable processes.'

Ms Leach said she was aware some staff had been told they could reapply for their old jobs. 'In my role as the secretary I've seen hundreds of letters sent to staff about this matter.'

'They say they've been looked at on a case by case basis but they are templated letters and they insert what you've written back to them and say ''even if we haven't addressed your concern don't think we haven't taken it into account'',' she claimed. 'Then they just terminate you, it's disgraceful'.

'I've spoken to nurses who have lost their homes over this'.

In repealing the vaccine mandate, Mr Walsh said wide ranging advice had been submitted that informed the decision. This included employee feedback, expert clinical advice, official immunisation advice, and a 'human rights assessment'.

Similar vaccine mandates for health workers were lifted in NSW at the end of 2022 but the mandate still stands in Victoria.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12941457/Vaccine-mandates-nurses-stood-Queensland.html

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

Management of Oral Lesions after COVID-19 Vaccination

I was always a bit prone to mouth ulcers but a natural remedy fixed them rapidly for me. A mouthful of salted peanuts taken during the day usually resulted in no ulcers the next day -- an extremely effective remedy. JR



By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

I recently had a patient who had salivary gland problems after vaccination and when I looked in her mouth I saw unusual lesions at the orifice of the parotid duct. I wondered if there were any solutions.

Joseph et al published a brief summary of the litany of oral/facial problems that develop after COVID-19 vaccination.

“Most common oral lesions reported in the literature following COVID-19 vaccination include maculae, petechiae, desquamation, edema, erythema multiforme-like lesions, erosions, and ulcers on the hard palate, oral floor, lips, tongue, and gingiva (Chun et al., 2022; Mazur et al., 2021; Sayare et al., 2021). Few studies also reported pemphigus vulgaris, bullous pemphigoid, herpes zoster, lichen planus, Stevens–Johnson syndrome, Behçet's disease, Bell's palsy, facial swelling, and lips, face, or tongue swelling associated with anaphylaxis, burning mouth syndrome, and oral candidiasis (Chun et al., 2022; Mazur et al., 2021; Thongprasom et al., 2021).”

Then the authors go on to give some very practical solutions I plan to keep in mind for my clinic.

“In most cases, after consulting a physician to rule out any other medical issue, application of 0.1% dexamethasone solution thrice daily, 50 mg/g nystatin syrup five times daily, acyclovir ointment, and 0.1% chlorhexidine gargle twice daily relieved the symptoms. Similarly, lichen planus in the buccal mucosa resolved with 0.1% dexamethasone solution, nystatin solution (100,000 U/mL), and 0.1% dexamethasone gargle thrice daily. Neuropathic pain following the COVID-19 vaccination was managed by 0.5 mg clonazepam and 150 mg pregabalin daily. Burning-mouth syndrome was relieved using a 2% lidocaine gargle daily and 10 mg nortriptyline. Oral candidiasis cases found relief using 0.5 mg clonazepam and fluconazole syrup regularly. All cases were resolved within a varying period of 1 week to 1 month, while some even took up to 2 months. These treatments significantly relieved all symptoms, including tongue pain and ulcerative lesions. However, erythema of palatal gingiva took a few weeks longer (Chun et al., 2022).

It is recommended that after COVID-19 vaccination, patients may avoid high-intensity workouts, alcohol consumption, and smoking for a few days after vaccination.”

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/management-of-oral-lesions-after-covid-19-vaccination-a97e5d49

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

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

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

The Covid vaccine gave me side effects that ruined my life, but Facebook keeps censoring me from telling my friends about what happened

A woman who says she suffered chronic health complications after taking the AstraZeneca vaccine claims to have been censored from sharing her story on Facebook.

Caroline Pover, 52, received the jab in March 2021 and within nine hours, experienced convulsions, shivering, breathing difficulties and low blood pressure.

Ms Pover, of Cirencester, Gloucestershire, says she was hospitalised when her condition escalated to 'stroke-like' symptoms, in addition to exhaustion, breathing difficulties, a racing heart and migraines.

Her story was shared in a national newspaper in March last year as she and 800 other victims struggled to claim the Government's Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS).

But after sharing the link on her Facebook feed at the start of this year, Ms Pover says the website put a warning notice on her account.

Ms Pover, herself a freelance journalist and entrepreneur, said: 'My posts about what was happening to me started having FB “notes” appearing underneath them about vaccination.

'A group page I was an admin on was shut down completely by Facebook in the summer of 2021.

'When I posted the Daily Express article, which did an excellent job of not discussing anything pro or anti... I received a warning and the post was hidden.

'It's a ridiculous situation for vaccine-injured people, who have a right to information.

'If this was an online support group relating to cancer or another type of serious condition, we'd be outraged at the thought of it being censored and we'd be very sensitive to people having to navigate a very complicated health situation.'

Ms Pover said she made her first post about vaccine side effects on March 3, 2021, shortly after receiving a Covid jab.

She said: 'In the week that followed I was posting about my health and I always thought I'd be fine the next day.

'After a few weeks, I noticed that little notes from Facebook were appearing whenever I posted anything relating to the vaccine.'

Ms Pover claims she was subsequently 'shadow banned' on Facebook and that often, her posts failed to appear in the timelines of her friends and family.

She said: 'People would tag me in posts and complain that they weren't getting any traction. I'd say to them, "don't tag me, it will just disappear if you do."'

Ms Pover says that over time, the censorship led her to develop a specific writing style that would help prevent posts from being flagged up.

She has also written a book about people receiving adverse reactions from Covid jabs, which was picked up by a publisher last year.

And she says her experiences with censorship have only made her even more determined to share her message.

Ms Pover said: 'The physical health struggles we face aren't just what happens in the minutes, hours or days immediately after injection; it's what we are still dealing with years later, as well as the impact of being censored.'

Facebook has been approached for comment.

Elsewhere on the platform, 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.

AstraZeneca said in a statement: 'Patient safety is our highest priority and regulatory authorities have clear and stringent standards to ensure the safe use of all medicines, including vaccines.

'Our sympathy goes out to anyone who has lost loved ones or reported health problems.

'From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, Vaxzevria has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects.

'The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (MHRA) has granted full marketing approval for Vaxzevria for the UK based on the safety profile and efficacy of the vaccine.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12942189/Covid-vaccine-effects-Facebook-censoring.html

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

Fauci Admits 'Six-Foot Social Distancing' Was Based on Nothing During Closed-Door Testimony

During Dr. Anthony Fauci’s second day of his closed-door interrogation with members of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, the former head of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases admitted shocking details about COVID-19.

The Committee, led by chairman Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), dove into 14 hours of testimony where Fauci acknowledged that his six-foot social distancing recommendation “was likely not based on any data.”

“It just sort of appeared,” the GOP-led Committee wrote, quoting Fauci. “Dr. Fauci acknowledged that the lab-leak hypothesis is not a conspiracy theory.”

Nearly four years after civilization collapsed due to Democrats pushing a mostly non-life-threatening virus, Fauci suggested that his “recommendations”—AKA mandates— were based on the desire to control the sheep, which proved that the majority of society is obedient and uninformed.

The Committee revealed that Fauci “advised American universities to impose vaccine mandates on their students,” despite the former NIH director admitting that vaccine mandates could “increase vaccine hesitancy in the future.”

“This comes nearly four years after prompting the publication of the now infamous ‘Proximal Origin’ paper that attempted to vilify and disprove the lab-leak hypothesis,” the Committee wrote.

Wenstrup said things became very “evident” following Fauci’s two-day-long testimony, adding that the above admissions from the NIH official were suppressed completely.

“During his interview today, Dr. Fauci claimed that the policies and mandates he promoted may unfortunately increase vaccine hesitancy for years to come,” the Republican wrote in his findings. “Further, the social distancing recommendations forced on Americans ‘sort of just appeared’ and were likely not based on scientific data. “[The transcribed interview] revealed systemic failures in our public health system and shed a light on serious procedural concerns with our public health authority.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2024/01/10/fauci-admits-six-foot-social-distancing-was-based-on-nothing-during-closed-door-testimony-n2633443

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

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

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

Censored!

Google has deleted the post that I put up here yesterday. It reported a very skeptical article about the Pfizer Covid vaccine.

 Never mind, however as the post is still available on my backup site:  https://johnjayray.com/jan24.html

Just scroll down tothe post of 9th.  

The article is also still available on the site from which I took it:

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/ex-who-advisormrna-covid-19-vaccines-dangerous-09b8d28e

The originating story is here:

https://www.aussie17.com/p/my-story-by-professor-gabriel-oon

There were actually two articles in my post yesterday.  The second was a  perfectly rigorous statistical analysis of seasonal influences on Covid incidence.  I can't see that Google would object to it so I have reprinted it under yesterday's date.  It is also still available on the site from which I took it:

https://www.ceres-science.com/post/new-research-finds-the-natural-seasonality-of-coronaviruses-had-more-influence-on-the-covid-19-pande

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

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.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/people-more-likely-to-suffer-vertigo-tinnitus-soon-after-covid-19-vaccination-study-5536583?ea_src=au-frontpage&ea_med=top-news-australia-top-news-0-large-top-news-australia-top-news-title-1

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

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.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12934455/Conspiracy-Covid-four-years-betrays-IAN-BIRRELL.html

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

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.”

https://www.ceres-science.com/post/new-research-finds-the-natural-seasonality-of-coronaviruses-had-more-influence-on-the-covid-19-pande

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

'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.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12935953/victim-life-changing-injuries-jab-speaking-censored.html

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

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.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2024/01/03/florida-surgeon-general-calls-for-halt-in-the-use-of-mrna-covid-vaccines-n2633142

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

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

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

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?

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/apparently-elderly-patients-in-europe-died-after-receiving-the-pfizer-vaccine.-why-has-there-been-no-widespread-reporting-c84d89a3

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

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.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/florida-clinic-conducting-large-ivermectin-study-targeting-covid-19-0a6a4464

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

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

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