Thursday, April 18, 2024

Japanese Epidemiological Bombshell: Investigators Link Mass mRNA Vaccination and Adverse Cancer Outcomes

Physician-Epidemiologist Miki Gibo affiliated with Matsubara Clinic and National Health Insurance Yusuhara Hospital in Yusuhara, Kochi, Japan and colleagues recently had a disturbing paper published in Cureus. Peer reviewed, the team for Japanese researchers look into the question of excess deaths during and after COVID-19 and incidence of cancer mortality after the third MRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

While talk or “turbo cancer” is rampant on social media such as X any such claims require significant evidence. TrialSite has chronicled real world data and tracked the growing number of case series involving some form of cancer in association to COVID-19 vaccines. But case series-based studies are not designed to establish causation. In collaboration with React19, TrialSite supported that patient advocacy’s development of the Scientific Publications Directory. Now managed by React19, approximately 200+ studies involving cancer and COVID-19 vaccination are available in this online study hub.

Dr. Gibo and colleagues discuss in their Cureus piece excess deaths including cancer in Japan, a population that was heavily exposed to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, and one that is rapidly aging. Their recent output was published just days ago in Cureus. Importantly, while the findings herein raise profoundly disturbing questions, this study output does not equate to confirmatory evidence that COVID-19 vaccines and cancer have some causal linkage. More investigation is necessary.

The Study

The team in this study evaluated how age-adjusted mortality rates (AMRs) for different types of cancer in Japan changed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022).

Tapping into official Japanese statistics and employing logistic regression analysis, the investigators compared observed annual and monthly AMRs with predicted rates based on pre-pandemic (2010-2019) figures.

What are the findings?

Interestingly, the team observed no significant excess mortality during the first year of the pandemic (2020). This data point resonates with other national data TrialSite reviewed in the United States, for example.

Disturbingly, Dr. Gibo and colleagues observed excess cancer mortality in 2021, after mass vaccination with the first and second vaccine doses. This data includes what the medical researchers report observations involving “significant excess mortalities” for all cancers, along with upward trends with select types of the disease.

This study discusses possible explanations for these increases in age-adjusted cancer mortality rates but is not designed to prove causation.


The Japanese medical researchers raise disturbing questions with this significant study. For example, as published in the peer-reviewed Cureus the team observed in 2022, after mass population exposure to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines “statistically significant increases in age-adjusted mortality rates of all cancer and some specific types of cancer, namely, ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate, lip/oral/pharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers.”

Declaring that the data exhibit “particularly marked increases in mortality rates of these ERα-sensitive cancers,” Dr. Gibo and colleagues suspect that the findings “may be attributable to several mechanisms of the mRNA-LNP vaccination rather than COVID-19 infection itself or reduced cancer care due to the lockdown,” the latter of which could just as well be an explanation.

But the former could be an explanation as well, and that’s a real problematic proposition needing immediate investigation. Gibo and colleagues certainly recommend more research.


Not clinically validated, the team taps into official data sources employing descriptive statistics. The authors suggest more statistical investigation associated with vaccination status is necessary to bolster any evidence.

The Study Authors’ Questions

Why are AMRs of ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate, lip/oral/pharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers increased significantly beyond the predicted rates, especially in 2022, in Japan?

Does the research of Solis et al. on the binding ability of S-protein of SARS-CoV-2 against over 9,000 human proteins matter here? In that research, the authors point out that S-protein specifically binds to ERα and upregulates the transcriptional activity of Erα. Importantly, all of the identified cancers are known as estrogen and estrogen receptor alpha (ERα)-sensitive cancers.

The present study points out more estradiol (E2) to human breast cancer cells can lead to proliferation of the cancer cells, whereas the addition of raloxifene, a selective ERα modulator, inhibits proliferation.

Could ERα-mediated transcription induce endogenous DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in ER-sensitive cancers? According to some research, “Transcriptionally activated ERα induces DSBs by topoisomerase II and the recently known R-loop/G-quadruplex structures formation, significantly increasing the need for BRCA1 for their repair in breast cancer cells.”

Dr. Gibo and colleagues point out that in their study they present “nuclear translocation of mRNA and S protein with the nuclear localization signal [90], and an in silico bioinformatic analysis showed interactions between the S2 subunit of S-protein and BRCA1, BRCA2, and P53 [91], possibly resulting in their sequestration and dysfunction.”

Could it be the case that a possible co-occurrence of high BRCA1 demand to repair DNA damage triggered by activated transcription via ERα bound with S-protein along with dysfunction of BRCA1 sequestrated by S-protein raises concerns about increased cancer risk in ERα-sensitive cells in mRNA-LNP SARS-CoV-2 vaccine recipients?


Reportedly, During Covid, The Elderly Were the First to be Sacrificed

Last month, it was reported former New York State governor Andrew Cuomo had been subpoenaed by Congress over elderly Covid deaths under Cuomo’s administration. The ex-governor was accused of using under-reported numbers to bolster his handling of COVID-19 especially with the number of deaths which occurred in 2020, when Cuomo required nursing homes to accept elderly Covid positive patients. As a result of this policy, Cuomo has been accused of causing the death of over 15,000 New Yorkers. His deposition in front of the Republican led House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic is scheduled for May.

“After misleading the public and filtering the truth from the American people regarding how many COVID-19 deaths occurred in nursing homes, Andrew Cuomo has been dodging our committee, delaying our investigation and refusing to take accountability,” New York Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-Staten Island), one of the panel’s members, said in a statement. Malliotakis added, “His misguided policies led to the deaths of more than 15,000 New Yorkers. His testimony is crucial to helping us prevent a tragedy like this from occurring ever again.” But the bigger question is, was this the only occurrence of Covid neglect? Apparently not.

United Kingdom

In 2023, TrialSite reported on a lawsuit against the British Government by the families of elderly patients who died in nursing homes. The families claimed not enough was done to take care of their loved ones and infected patients were transferred into nursing homes and spread the virus. This is eerily similar to the events which will soon have former New York State governor Andrew Cuomo appearing in front of a Congressional committee. It seems, however, there are more instances of Covid elder abuse in the UK.


In a recent article in the Daily Mail, there is a report of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) papers being forged. Relatives of elderly patients say their loved ones were left to die against the wishes of the families. This is now being investigated by the Scottish Covid-19 inquiry which has named the use of DNRs as one of the primary reasons for its investigation. According to one relative of an elderly woman who died, the relative’s name and signature were on a DNR authorization but the relative never saw nor signed the document.

The Scottish government insisted there was no change in advice given to clinicians during the pandemic regarding the use of DNRs, but the evidence in this area has shown, so far, this not to be true. Administrators at some elder care homes in Scotland have been accused of having a culture where health professionals urged nursing homes to update their “anticipatory care plans” for residents. One administrator says she was told, “You need to look at who doesn't have DNRs because they will now need to have one.” Allegedly, after this conversation DNRs were in place for all residents of the nursing home and the administrator wondered to what extent family members had been consulted. The impression the administrator had was if an elderly resident became ill with Covid, they wouldn’t go to the hospital. The administrator added, “You could clearly see that, if they went to hospital, they had a really good chance of improving, of getting over what was making them unwell in the first place. But it was almost like, you were not playing God, but it was just 'no, you can't go, so you just have to stay.” According to the administrator it was difficult for the nursing home to access ambulances, paramedics or hospital beds.

It is alleged the Scottish government allowed this practice. In January, TrialSite reported Scottish police were looking into the possibility of an “industrial sized’ cover up by Scottish ministers regarding deaths of elderly patients in nursing homes due to Covid. Twenty-two official internal complaints were raised concerning the Scottish government’s official response to the nursing home deaths. Again, on this issue, DNRs were involved.

Covid Devastated Nursing Homes
The pandemic neglect in nursing homes wasn’t limited to the UK. According to an article by the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2022, Covid deaths in elder care facilities accounted for at least 23% of all Covid deaths in the United States as of January 2022. Canada was ranked last for the amount of deaths caused by Covid in nursing home facilities.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) (2021) reported 570,626 nursing home residents' infections and 112,383 residents’ deaths in the USA before the wide availability of COVID-19 vaccination in 2020 for nursing home residents (e.g., Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson and Johnson). Since the mass vaccination program another 57,808 residents have died, at least a percentage of them, fully vaccinated against COVID-19.

TrialSite chronicled disproportionate morbidity and mortality among the nation’s most vulnerable, sick and elderly residents.

According to the Centers for Medicare data 170,191 elderly died in long term care during the pandemic. In what seems a low rate, only 43.3% of long-term care residents are up to date with their COVID-19 vaccines. Why would this be the case?

What is truly unfortunate is it seems the elderly have become political pawns and tragically, easily dispensable. It is problematic when a politician actually admits he covered up elderly deaths because the political data would be used against him. The shame of all of this remains the reality that this represents a worldwide problem (at least in developed nations in English speaking countries) and a sad comment on health care, politics and the world when the elderly—that is our parents and grandparents-- are so easily tossed away.




Wednesday, April 17, 2024

Rand Paul Pulls Back Curtain on the ‘Great COVID Cover-up’

In an explosive new op-ed, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) claimed that at least 15 separate federal agencies knew that attempts to create a COVID-19-like coronavirus were being undertaken at the Wuhan Institute of Virology as early as January 2018.
Yet heads of these agencies did not reveal this information to the public; for years, they actively refused to release information on the project to lawmakers such as Dr. Paul, who were attempting to provide congressional oversight.

“For years, I have been fighting to obtain records from dozens of federal agencies relating to the origins of COVID-19 and the DEFUSE project,” Dr. Paul, who in March revealed he was formally launching a bipartisan investigation into the virus’s origins with Democratic Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, wrote.
The DEFUSE project refers to a proposal submitted by EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S.-based nongovernmental organization headed by British zoologist Peter Daszak, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The purpose of the proposal was to “insert a furin cleavage site into a coronavirus to create a novel chimeric virus.”

Dr. Paul also identified two additional parties that were part of the original plan to create chimeric coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab: the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the federal agency formerly headed up by Dr. Anthony Fauci, and Dr. Ian Lipkin, a professor of epidemiology and one of the authors of the now-disgraced “Proximal Origin” paper. The authors of the paper, which was published in Nature in March 2020, stated that evidence clearly indicated that SARS-CoV-2 emerged naturally, even though privately, the authors expressed clear concerns that evidence suggested the virus was genetically designed.

Some scientists have already raised ethical concerns in response to the revelation.

“We now know Ian Lipkin was part of the initial DEFUSE proposal,” Bryce Nickels, a professor of genetics at Rutgers University, said in response to the revelation. “Everything he has said about COVID origins and his role in the fraudulent ‘Proximal Origins’ paper must now be reconsidered in the wake of these new revelations.”

It’s not just Lipkin, of course.

All of these parties failed to speak up when COVID-19, one of the deadliest viruses in a century, emerged from Wuhan, Dr. Paul said, and details of the DEFUSE project may not have come to light at all if not for a whistleblower (identified as Lt. Col. Joseph Murphy).

More details of what the Kentucky senator calls “the Great COVID Cover-up” are likely to materialize as Dr. Paul and Mr. Peters continue their investigation. But an abundance of evidence already shows it’s no exaggeration to use that word: coverup.

Dr. Paul is hardly the first government official to use the term.

Nearly a year ago, David Asher, a bioweapons specialist who led the State Department’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19, sat down with New York magazine journalist David Zweig and explained why there has been so little progress made in discovering the origins of COVID: Those with institutional power don’t want answers.

“It’s a massive coverup spanning from China to DC,” Mr. Asher said. “Our own state department told us, ‘Don’t get near this thing; it’ll blow up in your face.’”

Other government whistleblowers have also attempted to expose the coverup.

In August, the CIA confirmed that the agency was “looking into” allegations from a CIA whistleblower who claimed that analysts tasked with determining the origins of COVID were offered “significant” financial incentives to change their assessment that COVID likely emerged accidentally from the Wuhan lab. (It’s worth noting that Dr. Fauci allegedly was admitted to agency headquarters “without a record of entry” while the CIA was conducting its investigation into COVID’s origins.)

The reason the government would cover up DEFUSE becomes obvious when one analyzes the nature of the proposal, which British author Matt Ridley weeks ago noted included a great many “wacky” (and reckless) ideas such as spraying vaccines into bat caves to immunize them.

“In the end, what they were doing was making more dangerous viruses, with a view of understanding them,” Mr. Ridley said. “It looks very strongly as if in trying to prevent a pandemic they may have caused one.”

While we still do not know this for certain, it looks increasingly likely that COVID-19 was born of gain-of-function research that was partially funded by the U.S. government.
Though this result would be shocking to many, especially those who see the state as virtuous and infallible, it’s far less surprising to students of history and economics.

“The worst evils which mankind ever had to endure were inflicted by bad governments,” Ludwig von Mises wrote in “Omnipotent Government.” “The state can be and has often been in the course of history the main source of mischief and disaster.”

The reason for this is obvious. The more power is concentrated, the less accountable it becomes, and power without accountability is a recipe for disaster.


Australia: Senator Claims TGA ‘Overriding’ Experts While Processing Vaccine Injury Claims

Senator Gerard Rennick has alleged—under parliamentary privilege in the Senate—that the Therapeutic Goods Administration is “overriding the decision of the specialists” in refusing claims for vaccine injury from people who received COVID-19 vaccinations.

Services Australia administers the scheme, which offers people a way to seek a one-off compensation payment, instead of going through legal proceedings, if they experienced harm from a vaccine.

The Scheme was designed to “compensate for losses due to the harm ... suffered” and not for “pain and suffering.” The compensation covers lost earnings, out-of-pocket expenses, paid attendant care services, and “deceased ... vaccine recipient payments and funeral costs.”

To meet the criteria for the payment, Services Australia’s website says a person must have:

received an approved COVID-19 vaccine.

met the definition of harm, for example, an administration-related injury or one of the clinical conditions listed in the policy.

been admitted to hospital as an inpatient, or seen in an outpatient setting for an eligible clinical condition.

been admitted to hospital as an inpatient for an administration-related injury.

experienced losses or expenses of $1,000 or more.

The site also lists the eligible conditions including myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and the autoimmune disorder Guillain Barre Syndrome.

A claimant must have their condition verified by “a medical specialist in the relevant field of practice” (for instance, a cardiologist for myocarditis), and then send the medical report and evidence of the expenses being claimed for assessment by Services Australia.

Senator Claims to Have ‘Insider’ Informant

Mr. Rennick told the Senate that he had spoken to “an insider from the TGA” who had since resigned, and who “played a big role in designing this scheme.”

“The whole point of that scheme was that once the injured person got a specialist to say that the person was injured by the vaccine, he or she would be entitled to compensation. Now that is not happening,” the senator said.

“What is happening is Services Australia make these people wait [on average] 297 days to get a decision. Many of them can no longer work. They are seriously ill. They have to do all the legwork of trying ... see a specialist, a cardiologist or a rheumatologist, and that takes a lot of work. It’s very expensive. You’ve got to go and get MRIs or something to back [it] up. And then they’ve basically been neglected.”

He alleged that, once the claim came up for a decision, “what they do is [refer it] back to the TGA, [and the] TGA is a turning around and saying ‘we are overriding the decision of the specialists who actually examined the patient.’”

“Now my insider tells me these doctors at the TGA are not qualified to be overriding specialists. And I believe that if you haven’t examined the patient who you decide this isn’t actually a vaccine injury, how would you know?”

Mr. Rennick said he had talked to scientists—whom he did not name—who told him that “you will never know while a person’s leaving because you can’t take tissue samples from living people. So we are operating in the dark here in regards to our ability to examine what’s really going on as a result of these vaccine injuries.”

Only 14 Deaths Recognised as Vaccine-Related

Senator Rennick claimed there were 1,000 reports of suspected deaths due to the vaccines in the country.
“And how many have the TGA recognised? 14,” he said.

“When you press the TGA and you say to them, ‘Can you actually prove this wasn’t a vaccine?’ They say, ‘No, we can’t.’

He also claimed there were 10,000 unexplained excess deaths during the period between May and December 2021 when the vaccines were being administered.




Tuesday, April 16, 2024

Esteemed Australian Immunologist/Virologist on Long COVID & Long Vax: Spike Protein Pathogenicity

An author with the Australian Journal of General Practice, Emeritus Professor in Immunology, University of Queensland, Faculty of Science, now retired and independent to speak his mind, Robert Tindle, Ph.D. is no lightweight. Heavily published deep into the science of virology and immunology, he presently educates his peers about the plight of long COVID and long Vax patients.

Elaborating on the scope and severity of the crisis while directing attention to the patient's plight, Prof Tindle explains to the Australian medical establishment the mechanism of action now evidenced by mounting scientific literature concerning both long COVID and the vaccine injured, or long-Vax, the latter being not yet accepted, at least overtly, by medical establishments of the West. To alleviate patient suffering, a growing economic toll and a debilitated medical establishment, we must open our eyes to science, embrace the truth, and forge a new path forward.

Anywhere from 2% to 20% of individuals who are infected with SARS-Cov-2, the virus behind COVID-19, end up with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC or long COVID), according to the World Health Organization (WHO), European Union and the UK and US governments. This condition occurs >12 weeks after the initial COVID-19 infection and can endure for many months, even years. Recently the University of Queensland Australia Emeritus Professor elaborates on the condition millions of people struggle with worldwide, with hundreds of thousands of people in Australia coping with either long COVID or long Vax.

The recent paper was published as a viewpoint in the Australian Journal of General Practice, emphasizing that the plight of long COVID patients cannot be underestimated. Prof Tindle reports the presence of long COVID digital support groups emerging as a civil society safety net, but the lack of institutional scientific and medical support leads to a mounting crisis for patients. They are not listened to, and health systems are not prepared for delivering the right care, meaning long COVID patients resort to self-prescribed medication with use of over-the-counter remedies for example, diet changes and the like.

A heterogeneous disease with myriad of symptoms (cardiac, pulmonary, hematological and neurological), the retired Australian scientist points to overlap with myalgia encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, postural orthopedic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) and other post-viral manifestations.

What’s behind lingering COVID-19 symptoms despite the clearing of the infection? No one can be certain and according to the Australian scientist, “Public officials are flying blind when it comes to long COVID and vaccination.” But Tindle introduces some of the unfolding science for explanations.

While patients are not able to find a trustworthy diagnosis, they are often required to seek multiple medical positions, and these patients are often told they are merely struggling with anxiety or post-pandemic mental health issues.

What’s the medium duration of long COVID symptoms? According to Tindle, it is five months, however, 10% of long COVID patients may experience symptoms at month 12. In fact, fatigue, shortness of breath and difficulty concentrating can persist with this patient cohort still by year two after infection.

Still what is up in the air is whether some people may never recover.

What are some biomarkers involved?

Patients struggling with long COVID may present elevated inflammatory biomarkers, such as interleukin-6, C-reactive protein, tumor necrosis factor-α), possibly functioning as a core set of blood biomarkers that can be used to diagnose and manage long COVID patients in clinical practice.

Economic Contagion

Prof Tingle reports that 20% of long COVID patients in the UK either stopped working or were not able to return to work six months after their initial infection. In Australia, 240,000 persons with long COVID can no longer work full time. Meanwhile, absenteeism on the job only grew, accelerated with long COVID.

Make no mistake, economies are impacted. From reduced working time to loss of earning capability, and the lack of diagnosis in countries like Australia, this means that many won’t be eligible for disability schemes.

With no guidelines for how long COVID patients can access social security and employment protection, the working classes are particularly vulnerable.

Nowhere to Turn?

Efforts at establishing long COVID clinics have not translated into sustained access to care. Without substantive treatment guidelines or support they become “little more than incident report centers.” Moreover, waiting times in such long COVID clinics can equate to many months. In fact, in places like Australia, Prof. Tindle informs us that many GPs are not even aware of such clinics!

However, some progress has been made in Europe, reports Tindle. Some European nations and the UK offer more established long COVID clinics offering everything from online recovery platforms to GP training and even specialty access for children.

Bombshell: COVID-19 Vaccination & Long COVID

While TrialSite has reviewed some study results suggesting that vaccination may have put a dent in long COVD, other credible studies imply no such connection. Frankly, the evidence is both mixed, and not strong enough for any claims that the COVID-19 vaccines inhibit long COVID.

But Prof. Tindle goes on the record, expressing his concern that “COVID-19 vaccination per se might contribute to long COVID, giving rise to the colloquial term ‘Long Vax.”

Importantly, while most national medical establishments in the West such as the United States or the UK don’t yet accept the premise that the spike protein manifested from mRNA vaccines can lead to damage, Tindle in this established Australian General Practitioners journal expresses his viewpoint that “the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 exhibits pathogenic characteristics and is a possible cause of post-acute sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination.”

Supporting the mRNA vaccine-induced spike protein as a pathogenic agent hypothesis, Tindle continues, “COVID-19 vaccines utilize a modified, stabilized prefusion spike protein that might share similar toxic effects with its viral counterpart.”

The Australian virologist/immunologist proffers, “A possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and the incidence of POTS have been demonstrated of 284,592 COVID-19 vaccinated individuals, though at a rate that was one-fifth of the incidence of POTS after SARS-CoV-2 infection.” He points to Kwan et al.

Hammering on a topic deemed taboo for at least a while in medical establishments, the vaccine induced spike protein pathogenicity represents a real problem, pointing to very real-world, well-established links to myocarditis risk.

And what about the problem of mRNA biodistribution? Throughout the pandemic, medical establishment actors and representatives informed that the COVID-19 vaccination was safe and effective, and that there were no risks of the mRNA-induced spike protein circulating in the body for longer periods of time, and in the process, ending up in far flung tissues and organs. The mRNA would simply flush out via the lymphatic system in a matter of days, maybe a week at the most.

Of course, TrialSite has chronicled the incidence and studies disproving this continuous myth, at least in a percentage of individuals receiving COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Prof Tindle verifies this reality, reporting, “mRNA vaccines can result in spike protein expression in muscle tissue, the lymphatic system, cardiomyocytes and other cells after entry into the circulation,” citing Trougakos et al.

Moreover, growing evidence suggests, and Tindle confirms in his viewpoint that individuals receiving at least two doses of mRNA vaccine “display a class switch to IgG4 antibodies.” Citing Uversky et al., Tindle articulates an important point as “abnormally high levels of IgG4 might cause autoimmune disease, promote cancer growth, autoimmune myocarditis and other IgG4-related diseases (IgG4-RD) in susceptible individuals.”

Long Vax, Another Crisis

Tindle steps into the controversial topic of COVID-19 vaccine injured, or long vax, seamlessly and with ease and backed by the unfolding science, comparing it to long COVID in many ways.

Reaffirming a growing body of evidence observing COVID-19 vaccination, including boost courses, with “incidence of long COVID-like symptoms, adding further to public health officials’ concerns.”

And key to any resolution, including therapeutic options, would be to scientifically comprehend the cellular and pathological effects of COVID-19 vaccination with and without infection. Yet vaccine approvals, accelerated during the pandemic crisis, lacked any long term-safety data, a growing concern according to Prof Tindle given the possibility of immune dysfunction.

A key point Tindle seeks to make here is that it’s quite likely at least among susceptible individuals COVID-19 vaccinations could be associated with long COVID. Put another way, “It is perhaps, premature to assume that the past SARS-CoV-2 infection is the sole common factor in long COVID.”

Where to Go from Here?

From expressing hope that $50 million in Australia’s Medical Research Future Fund may help advance practical medical and scientific knowledge into the matter, Tindle also seems somewhat hopeful about a national center for disease control providing a national interrogative repository for what have been to date, “fragmented incidence and outcome data for long COVID.”

Tindle also points to a promising study last year led by scientists at QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute in Brisbane, Australia demonstrating in a preclinical study involving a model of peptide inhibitor of nuclear angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. The scientists reported in the prestigious peer-reviewed journal Nature Communications that this led to reversing “persistent inflammation driving long COVID” while also “reducing the latent viral reservoir in monocytes/macrophages” while associated with “reduced SARS-CoV-2 spike protein expression in monocytes from individuals who are recovered from infection.” Clinical trials were pending at the time last year, and TrialSite will do a follow up article on that discovery.

The message from this important viewpoint published in GP’s journal in Australia--more clearly needs to be done to help struggling patients, whether they are diagnosed with long COVID or long Vax.




Monday, April 15, 2024

Censored again

Google have just deleted my post of 24 March about myocarditis in children. It is however still available at its original source:

COVID Infection Not the Only Cause for Long COVID: Immunologist

Long COVID may not be solely caused by a COVID-19 infection given the lack of long-term safety data associated with the COVID-19 vaccine, an immunology professor has said.

In an externally peer-reviewed op-ed published by the Australian Journal of General Practice, Emeritus Professor Robert Tindle said that public health officials are “flying blind” when it comes to linking long COVID to post-COVID-19 vaccination.

“There is no consensus on what causes lingering COVID-19 symptoms long after the acute infection has cleared,” Mr. Tindle opined, adding that patients who are unable to secure a diagnosis for long COVID have sought multiple medical opinions only to be told the condition is due to “anxiety or post-pandemic mental issues.”

Long COVID is described by the World Health Organisation as the continuation or development of new symptoms three months after the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection, with these symptoms lasting for at least two months without any alternative explanation. This definition is now accepted by the Australian government.

The median time for long COVID symptoms is five months, with 10 percent of patients having symptoms at 12 months, according to a study.

Fatigue, shortness of breath, and difficulty concentrating have been reported in patients up to two years post-infection.

Mr. Tindle said that the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 exhibits pathogenic characteristics, and is a possible cause of acute symptoms after a COVID-19 infection or post-vaccine.

“COVID-19 vaccines utilise a modified, stabilised prefusion spike protein that might share similar toxic effects with its viral counterpart,” Mr. Tindle said.

“A possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and the incidence of POTS (postural orthopaedic tachycardia syndrome) has been demonstrated in a cohort of 284,592 COVID-19-vaccinated individuals, though at a rate that was one-fifth of the incidence of POTS after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

Mr. Tindle listed other associations with long COVID following the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine, including an increase in myocarditis post-vaccination, elevated spike proteins in muscle tissues, the lymphatic system, and the circulatory system, and elevated levels of IgG4 antibodies that are linked to the promotion of cancer.

“There are clear implications for vaccine boosting where these and similar observations relating to COVID-19 vaccination and the incidence of long COVID-like symptoms are substantiated, adding further to public health officials’ concerns,” he said.

“Understanding the persistence of viral mRNA and viral protein and their cellular pathological effects after vaccination with and without infection is clearly required.

“Because COVID-19 vaccines were approved without long-term safety data and might cause immune dysfunction, it is perhaps premature to assume that past SARS-CoV-2 infection is the sole common factor in long COVID.”

Moreover, Dr. Aseem Malhotra—Britain’s high-profile cardiologist and previous supporter of mRNA COVID vaccines—previously told The Epoch Times that heart complications—such as cardiac arrhythmia, heart failure, cardiac arrest, myocarditis, and pericarditis—have seen an uptick since the vaccine rollout.

“Long vax” is the colloquial term used to describe long COVID caused by vaccination.

Long COVID From Omicron Variant

Meanwhile, a study by the Australian National University (ANU) has found the risk of developing long COVID from the Omicron variant is higher than originally thought.

The Australian study found that in a highly vaccinated population not broadly exposed to earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants, 18 percent of people infected with the Omicron variant reported symptoms consistent with long COVID 90 days after infection.

“Despite reports that the risk of long COVID may be lower following Omicron infections than with earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants, we found that the burden of long COVID may be substantial 90 days after Omicron infections,” lead researcher Mulu Woldegiorgis said.

Additionally, the study found that 90 percent of the study participants with long COVID reported experiencing multiple symptoms, such as tiredness and fatigue (70 percent), followed by difficulty thinking or concentrating (brain fog), sleep problems, and coughing. A third of women in the study reported changes in their menstrual cycle.

However, a study by Germany’s Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg has shown that unvaccinated people infected with the Omicron variant had the lowest risk of long COVID.
The study found that while previous infections reduce the risk of long COVID by 86 percent, vaccination status prior to COVID infection is irrelevant to a person’s risk of developing long COVID.

However, the authors of the German study acknowledged that none of the participants were given an actual diagnosis of long COVID or tested for comorbidities.

Long COVID Presents Health and Financial Challenges

Mr. Tindle outlined the health and financial challenges faced by Australians who have long COVID, saying that support measures need to be in place for those who suffer from the chronic condition.

According to a 2022 study (pdf) by the Australian National University (ANU), approximately 500,000 adult Australians, or 4.7 percent have experienced long COVID.

Mr. Tindle described the frustrations expressed by long COVID support groups, such as the Australian Long COVID Community Facebook Support Group, including inadequate health system responses in dealing with long COVID.

“The outcome for some of those experiencing long COVID is self-prescribed medication using over-the-counter remedies and dietary changes based on potentially conflicting or misleading online information. Some speak of a substantial proportion of their income being used this way,” he said.

However, Mr. Tindle did acknowledge the listings of antiviral drugs for COVID such as Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir) and Lagevrio (molnupiravir).

An estimated 240,000 of those with long COVID no longer work full time, thus affecting the economy, Mr. Tindle said.

“Reduced to working part-time to cope with unwellness, those with long COVID commonly report having to wait a year or more before receiving a diagnosis,” he said.

“Without a definitive diagnosis, those with long COVID are not eligible for Job Seeker, the Disability Support Pension and National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) protection under the Fair Work Act, thereby conferring long-term financial difficulties for themselves and their dependents.

“There is a need for guidelines on how those with long COVID can access social security and employment protection.”

Mr. Tindle added that both the federal and state health departments need to provide more guidance to primary healthcare providers on handling long COVID.

“Although some states have established long COVID clinics, some of these at least are of little help to the patient in providing substantive treatment guidelines or support and are little more than incident report centres,” he said, adding that the wait time for a long COVID clinic is usually months, with some GPs unaware of the clinics’ existence.

“Long COVID is not an easy medical condition for clinicians, health administrators, support systems, or patients. The Australian health system is already stretched in coping with other chronic medical conditions,” he said.

“Nevertheless, we must do better than in the approximate three years since long COVID was first reported.”




Sunday, April 14, 2024

Washington Post sides with the vaccine establishment

The Covid pandemic opened up a new era, one that likely has significant implications across medicine. Because of the worst epidemic in modern history, there is no longer a blind acceptance of the pharmaceutical industry, or at least some of the players within that industry, which, because of the coronavirus, appeared to put profit over care.

From the onset of the pandemic, TrialSite chronicled how Pfizer not only cut corners concerning regulatory matters (e.g., no IND-enabling studies, no sufficient pharmacodynamics) but also shamelessly exploited the pandemic for profit, a form of profiteering during the worst breakout of a disease in a century. Additionally, the imposition of vaccine mandates which led to deepening political divisions within the United States.

Compounding this is the behavior of Big Pharma with their seemingly relentless crusade to avoid price oversight for medications in any possible way and the additional effort to deny and deflect responsibility for possible Covid vaccine injury, or “long-vax.”. Even U.S. government agencies mandated with protecting the public seem stubbornly steadfast in aligning with industry over the people on the issue of vaccine injury.

Given history and the controversy surrounding the politicization of the Covid pandemic it is, perhaps, a given the “vaccine wars” could persist as an ongoing political hot potato topic. And what a topic for instilling tension and divisiveness, all helpful in ensuring advertiser interest.

Mainstream Media’s Rush to Judgement?

Recently, The Washington Post ventured into the vaccine wars when it published an article on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s newly announced running mate, Nicole Shanahan. A tech lawyer who was once married to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, Shanahan has a history of being involved in Democratic politics, but not anymore.

Also, a mother, Shanahan has opened up that her own child has been vaccine injured, or so she believes. It turns out Shanahan’s daughter was diagnosed with autism and as reported in the Washington Post this led the very successful mother to investigate the disease.

Shanahan doesn’t deny the importance of the pharmaceutical sector, quoted by the fourth largest daily in the U.S. by circulation “Pharmaceutical medicine has its place, but no single safety study can assess the cumulative impact of one prescription on top of another prescription, and one shot on top of another shot on top of another shot, throughout the course of childhood. We just don’t do that study right now and we ought to. We can and we will. Conditions like autism used to be one in 10,000. Now here in the state of California it is one in 22.”

While Shanahan has expressed serious skepticism about certain vaccines, she and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are not “anti-vaxxers” as she has explained. The VP choice referred to an interview Kennedy did with Newsweek magazine saying he is only concerned with vaccine injuries. The New York Times also did a profile of Shanahan in which she also expressed her concern about vaccine injuries.

Checked with Experts

The Washington Post checked in with five autism experts to question the view of Shanahan, and the group concluded Shanahan’s views are “misguided, wrong or lacking context.” The article then goes on to accuse Kennedy of being a long purveyor of falsehoods about vaccines, spreading misinformation, particularly about a measles outbreak in Samoa.

Clearly not objective, any questioning of the autism rates of today has nothing to do with any vaccines, goes the Ministry of Truth. Yes, Wakefield was proven to be wrong, and despite the fact that the childhood vaccination schedule has exponentially increased, and there have been no longitudinal studies tapping into observational real-world data, doesn’t seem to matter to The Washington Post.

The article concludes “Shanahan does not quite say that vaccines cause autism, but she implies it, demanding a study that is not feasible because it would be unethical. Not true at all. Real-world evidence are used frequently to study medical and health-related trends, less the need for randomized controlled trials and the use of a placebo.

Does The Washington Post’s immediate dismissal of any of Shanahan’s concerns evidence the true bias associated with this media?

The media points out that Shanahan cites numbers that claim that autism has spiked, without acknowledging it as the main reason for this trend: the very definition of autism has expanded over time. But how do we know this latter point is the only answer? Should it not be investigated?

Assuming the role of arbiter of truth The Washington Post effectively establishes that anybody that dares question vaccine policy equals a proponent of anti-vaccine rhetoric. Meaning according to the Jeff Bezos owned asset (via Nash Holdings) “The overall effect is to cast doubt on the safety of vaccines.”

Whether or not Shanahan is right or wrong doesn’t appear to be an issue for the Bezos’ controlled media.

Yet the childhood vaccination schedule continues to grow, along with waiver of liability since the 1986 Vaccine Act. That initial waiver was put in place to ensure vaccine makers were incentivized to step into what were at the time low margin businesses.

However, times have changed. Vaccines can be quite profitable, and with limited liability along with advancing science uncovering new targeted opportunity this has led to a growing supply of vaccines. Pfizer generated nearly $100 billion on COVID shots alone.

Denying what vaccines have done for modern health is silly. One only needs to look at smallpox, polio, measles and the associated morbidity and mortality figures pre- and post-vaccination, to get an appreciation of the progress.

But raising targeted questions is most certainly what science should be all about, and while Kennedy can seem slippery on some of the issues, he has also consistently taken on corporate power in the courts on the behalf of consumers--in the spirit of consumer rights activist Ralph Nader.

Some recent polls evidence an appreciation for Kennedy’s message, which to a great extent seems to align with an interesting fusion of the traditional social democrats of yesteryear challenging both corporate power and the polarization of socio-economic class division yet the whole campaign is infused with both libertarian and national populist strains.

In some recent polls, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. polls in the double digits, not seen since the independent candidate Ross Perot made his run.


Biden quietly revokes COVID executive order requiring masks in federal buildings

President Biden retracted several COVID-19 executive orders Friday — including one imposed on his first day in office to require people to wear masks in federal facilities.

Biden’s Executive Order 13991 — titled “Protecting the Federal Workforce and Requiring Mask-Wearing” — was issued after the wearing of face masks became heavily polarized, with outgoing President Donald Trump and his aides rarely wearing them and focusing on “reopening” from lockdowns.

The order is “hereby revoked,” the White House said in a Friday afternoon announcement more than four years after the virus brought mobile morgues to New York and shut down schools and businesses across the country.

Under the prior order, federal agencies were told to “immediately take action” to “require compliance with CDC guidelines with respect to wearing masks, maintaining physical distance, and other public health measures by: on-duty or on-site Federal employees; on-site Federal contractors; and all persons in Federal buildings or on Federal lands.”

The enforcement of mask requirements long ago subsided, with the White House lifting its own internal mask requirements more than two years ago in March 2022 after the CDC adjusted its mask recommendations to account for local risk reflected by hospitalization rates.

Biden on Friday also retracted Executive Order 13998, adopted on Jan. 21, 2021, that sought to impose mask mandates on flights, trains and buses, and Executive Order 13910, adopted by Trump on March 23, 2020, to forbid the hoarding of medical supplies.

The announcement additionally terminated federal positions created to manage the pandemic.

“The positions of COVID-19 Response Coordinator [vacant since June 2023] and Deputy Coordinator of the COVID-19 Response… are hereby terminated,” Biden decreed.

The developments mark a near complete return to pre-pandemic rules after a gradual easing of enforcement.

Biden in June 2022 ended requirements that travelers entering the US — including American citizens — present negative COVID-19 tests. That rule was announced in January 2021 in the final days of the Trump administration.

Biden in May 2023 ended his mandate, imposed in September 2021, that all federal workers submit to COVID-19 vaccination or lose their jobs unless they had a qualifying religious or medical exemption.

Other pivots back to the pre-pandemic status quo have worried Biden’s critics, including his administration’s April 2023 decision to resume funding for the EcoHealth Alliance, a group that did risky US-financed “gain of function” research on coronaviruses at a lab in Wuhan, China, before the pandemic’s origin in the same city in late 2019.




Thursday, April 11, 2024

Decision Reserved in Case of Ontario Doctor Who Questioned COVID Lockdowns

An Ontario doctor who was critical of COVID lockdowns argued her case in court on April 10.

Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill was trying to quash three cautions placed on her public file by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO). The cautions were made after two tweets in 2020 by Dr. Gill, in which she questioned COVID lockdowns. Dr. Gill became well known during the COVID-19 pandemic for her online challenges to the government’s public health restrictions.

The panel of three judges of the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court reserved their decision on the judicial review, which means there is no set date on which the decision will be released.

Dr. Gill, who specializes in pediatrics, allergy, and clinical immunology, amassed a significant following on X, formerly known as Twitter, where she expressed opinions and concerns about government’s pandemic response, including the potential negative effects of lockdowns and other mandates.

Because of that, she became the subject of seven public complaints lodged with the CPSO, along with a separate investigation by the college’s registrar.

All eight cases were reviewed by the CPSO committee known as the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) in February 2021.

While the committee dismissed five of the complaints, it issued orders for three separate cautions to be placed on her public file.

On March 24, Elon Musk’s X announced that it would help pay her legal bills in trying to get the cautions overturned, saying in a post, “X is proud to help defend Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill against the government-supported efforts to cancel her speech.”

That prompted a heartfelt thank you on X from Dr. Gill: “elonmusk’s @X contacted me directly confirming Elon’s committment to pay remainder of campaign to reach $300K AND Elon has committed to assisting my appeal of 3 CPSO cautions, for my 2020 tweets opposing lockdowns, to the very end (ONCA&SCC if needed) May Waheguru bless you.”

Dr. Gill is represented by Libertas Law. In a news release from Libertas, lawyer Lisa Bildy said, “The CPSO issued guidance that doctors’ opinions during Covid-19 had to align with the government and took steps to censure ethical physicians who raised alarm bells about public health policies.”

“But the stifling of scientific debate, especially on novel measures being imposed on a massive scale, is not reasonable, in our submission, nor is it in the public interest,” Ms. Bildy continued.

The two tweets from August 2020 that were the subject of the cautions questioned if there were valid reasons for the lockdowns.

The first said, “There is absolutely no medical or scientific reason for this prolonged, harmful and illogical lockdown.”

The second tweet said, “If you have not yet figured out that we don’t need a vaccine, you are not paying attention.”

In a series of posts on X from the judicial review on April 10, JRwatch_ON said Dr. Gill’s lawyer argued that her client’s tweets were based on evidence, and that debate is important in a democratic society.

In the news release, Libertas Law said while some have portrayed Dr. Gill as an “anti-vaxxer,” it is not true.

“She has always been a proponent of routine childhood vaccines in her clinical practice,” adding that “she also supports Covid vaccines for high-risk individuals with informed consent.”

It says there was no COVID-19 vaccine authorized anywhere in the world in August 2020 when Dr. Gill posted the tweet about vaccines.

“The comment was in relation to a press conference that day by Dr. Theresa Tam in which she stated that, despite the anticipated authorization of a vaccine, possibly by that year’s end, it would not be a silver bullet and lockdowns and restrictions could persist for at least another two or three years,” said the release.

In addition, it said that “the use of widespread and prolonged lockdowns of healthy and low-risk people was contrary to all prior pandemic planning and principles of public health,” adding “evidence of lockdown harms has continued to mount.”

For its part, the CPSO has argued that the evidence indicated lockdowns in China and South Korea were having an effect, and said Dr. Gill was making misinformed and misleading statements, adding it was irresponsible to make such statements on social media during a pandemic.

The hearing is the latest in Dr. Gill’s legal battles. Last fall, she was scheduled for a disciplinary hearing by the CPSO, which was suddenly dropped in September, without the CPSO providing any specific reasons.

In a post at the start of the April 10 judicial review, Dr. Gill posted to X, “I’m at the Divisional Court of the Superior Court of Ontario today with my brilliant lawyer @LDBildy and the support of @elonmusk’s @X.”

And at the end of the hearing, Dr. Gill posted: “and that’s a wrap. A sincere thank you to all who sent their prayers & well wishes, & all who followed along the @JRwatch_ON live-tweets.”


High Dose Spirulina Regimen Remarkably Reduces COVID-19 Mortality, Improves Hospital Discharge Rate in 7-Day Window

A biomass of cyanobacteria, meaning blue-green algae, spirulina (arthrospira platensis), a cyanobacterium is consumed by both humans and animals, cultivated worldwide. Purported to have anti-inflammatory, antiviral and antioxidant effects, in Western society any claims must be backed by well-designed, randomized controlled trials.

The form Arthrospira is used as a dietary supplement or whole food. What’s the effect of high-dose Spirulina supplementation on hospitalized adults with COVID-19? With not a lot of research backing such a question, a Persian team of scientists affiliated with Pasteur Institute of Iran, Bahalrloo Hospital at Tehran University of Medical Sciences and even one of the scientists affiliated with Tufts University in the U.S. sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose Spirulina platensis for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The results are frankly remarkable, but the study has limitations—the open-label introduces the opportunity for biases, and the study size suggests the need for larger confirming studies, the results published in the Frontiers in Immunology peer-reviewed journal point to a significant finding. Western medicine would not accept these findings as particularly earth shaking but nonetheless, TrialSite points out some possibly intriguing outcomes.

Brief Background

The general class of product is used as feed supplement across aquaculture, aquariums and poultry industries. The use of this natural product started in the Americas—actually in present day Mexico by the Aztecs and other Mesoamericans until the 16th century. Upon the Spanish conquest soldiers of Cortes documented its use. Fast forward to modern day in addition to use as a supplement and for the industries mentioned above, spirulina is under investigation to address food security and malnutrition, plus as dietary support in scenarios such as space flight or even the Mars mission. With less need for land and water than livestock, the supplement represents an economical source of protein and energy.

What’s the basis for this Persian study?

In many societies, dietary supplements are reportedly helpful as supplements in response to viral infections. Take Spirulina, the filamentous, gram-negative cyanobacterium—a blue-green microalga that is a non-nitrogen-fixing photoautotroph according to the authors of this study recently published in Frontiers in Immunology.

Rich in protein (over 70%), plus vitamins, minerals (e.g., D, B12, provitamin A (beta carotene) and iron), numerous other ingredients are present such as phycocyanobilin (PCB), according to the Persian authors, which is a blue pigment protein with anti-inflammatory, anticancer and antioxidant properties.

Citing previous research, the authors of this study articulate that Spirulina consumption boosts B-group vitamins, especially B6, while decreasing interleukin-4 (IL-4) levels in persons with allergic rhinitis. But the substance also increases immunoglobulin A levels in saliva, suggesting that it could possibly enhance mucosal immunity. The supplement is also known to increase function of natural killer (NK) cells while boosting interferon-y (IFN-y) secretion, thus in aggregate overall better innate immune system health.

Finally, with a substance known as calcium spirulan (Ca-Sp) also present, the Iran-based investigators cite in vitro studies suggesting that this substance inhibits growth of select enveloped viruses, such as mumps virus, measles virus, influenza A (IAV), HIV-1, human cytomegalovirus and herpes simplex type 1. But in Western society, this is not widely touted, at least not in medical establishment circles. Evidence requires well-designed randomized studies.

Corresponding authors for this study included Seyed Ahmad Seyed Alinaghi, M.D., M.Phil, Ph.D. with Tehran University of Medical Science, Iranian Research Center for HIV/AIDs, Iranian Institute for Reduction of High-Risk Behaviors.

The Study

The Persian team designed a randomized controlled trial (IRCT20210216050373N1) investigating the research hypothesis: can high dose Spirulina supplement reduce COVID-19-related mortality or accelerate hospital discharge within seven days; secondary endpoint involved overall discharge or mortality?

This study was an open-label trial, conducted in a multi-center environment involving both Ziaeian Hospital and Baharloo Hospital, both affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences. The trial site team recruited patients from July 27, 2021, through to February 17, 2022.

Importantly, the trial site team had to change the study from single-blind trial due to the patients in the Tehran hospitals not trusting the placebo, meaning recruitment was too challenging. This is why the investigators had to remove the placebo. The authors appeared to have followed good clinical practices, triggering protocol change, etc.

Randomized and controlled, the study team’s trial involved 189 patients with COVID-19, randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to an experimental group receiving 15.2g of Spirulina supplement plus standard of care (44 non-intensive care units and 52 ICU).

Conducted over a six-day period, the trial site team monitored immune mediators on days 1,3,5 and 7.

What were the study findings?

By day 7 of the study, no deaths associated with COVID-19 were reported in the Spirulina group. 15 deaths (15.3%) occurred in the control group. Within seven days, the Persian study team reported, “A greater number of patients discharged in the Spirulina group (97.7%) in the non-ICU compared to the control group (39.1%) (HR, 6.52; 95% CI, 3.50 to 12.17).”

The study team reports mortality was overall higher in the control group (8.7% non-ICU, 28.8% ICU) compared to the Spirulina group (non-ICU HR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.97; ICU, HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.48).

Additionally, the team reports those patients in the ICU and in the Spirulina, arm evidenced “significant decrease in the levels of MIP-1α and IL-6.” Meanwhile, in those subjects in the intervention group (Spirulina) across ICU and non-ICU subgroups as intervention time increases reported IFN-y levels were significantly higher. Of course, this latter observation represents a cytokine playing a critical role in the immune response against both viral and bacterial infections, as well as in regulating immune response, inflammation and tumor surveillance.

The study authors report no presentation of side effects related to the Spirulina supplements.


The Persian team finds that high-dose Spirulina combined with the standard of care regimen in that part of the world targeting COVID-19 “may improve recovery and remarkably reduce mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.”


The Western medical world will not respond to this study result for a number of reasons. First, as the Persian authors self-declared, the study was not blinded, but as mentioned above, the investigators had to adjust to ensure sufficient level of recruitment.

TrialSite points out that non-blinded studies introduce several issues into interpreting the study result. From the potential of bias (selection bias, performance bias and detection bias) to placebo effect to observer bias and less objectivity, to mention some issues, blinded status becomes important for medical establishment acceptance.

Also, because use of traditional and herbal medicine is widespread among Persian (Iranian) peoples, the data obtained from follow-up post discharge can easily be unreliable. Importantly the authors point out this use of traditional and herbal medicines markedly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. While follow-up was not part of the study protocol, the physician-scientists running this study to their credit “tried our best to follow up with patients long term.”

But many patients were not interested in follow-up post discharge due to a confluence of standard reasons one would find across much of the world.




Wednesday, April 10, 2024

As an Epidemiologist, I Could See Straight Away That Covid Was Being Over-Hyped


It was an evening in mid-March 2020. Almost two years had passed since I retired from the University of Arizona, where I was a Professor of Epidemiology in the College of Public Health.

I was watching the news from Israel, the country in which I lived during the first three decades of my life. The reporters were broadcasting a forthcoming catastrophe, a doomsday in the making. It was all about a new coronavirus epidemic which erupted in China and had reached Israel, Europe and parts of the U.S.

Like everyone, I have been following the news from the Far East since the beginning of the year. Although infectious diseases were not my subject matter research, epidemiologists are trained to think critically, to question what many accept at face value. The picture that emerged was far from clear. A few observations did not fit well with the apocalyptic predictions.

So, I decided to write a short article in Hebrew and submit it as an op-ed to a newspaper in Israel. That’s how the series of essays now published as The Covid Pandemic: Unconventional Analytical Essays (2020-2023) started. It was supposed to have ended about three years later with my summary of what has actually happened in Israel (as opposed to the official narrative), but I added a few more later articles on Covid vaccines. In between, I wrote about many aspects of the pandemic, drawing upon data from Sweden, Denmark, Europe, Arizona, the US, the U.K. and Israel.

Forty essays are included in the book. The first one was titled ‘Hold off on that Apocalyptic Consensus About the Coronavirus’ (March 24th 2020). All of them were written for the public at large and were data driven. They were not based on ‘opinion’ or ‘intuition’. They are science, as best as I know it. If written in a formal, academic style, many of these essays could have been submitted to epidemiology journals. Whether they would have passed the guards of official narratives is a different question.

What will you find in the book?

Back in 2020, I devoted several essays to lockdown-free Sweden and showed, unequivocally, the futility of lockdowns and the misleading comparison of Sweden to neighbouring Nordic countries. The last one in this series, published in 2022, was titled ‘Sweden or the World: Which was a Cautionary Tale?’, paraphrasing headlines that claimed the opposite in the spring of 2020.

Several essays have estimated the death toll of panic-triggered responses to the pandemic. By September 2021, before the return of the flu, between 15% and 30% of the excess mortality in the U.S. may be attributed to the so-called mitigation efforts (‘The Mystery of Unaccounted Excess Deaths in the U.S.’). These were lives that were lost in vain — at least 115,000 deaths and possibly twice as many. The consequences of lockdowns and disruptions of normal life did not end in 2021. Lives have continued to be lost in many countries, including the U.K. Some of the mechanisms are described in my essay ‘Covid: The Death Toll of Panic’.

In numerous essays, I studied excess mortality and explained why trends should be examined over an entire winter (‘flu years’), not by calendar years. Using this approach, I estimated the excess mortality in Europe (‘How Severe was the Pandemic in Europe?’). In the first year (2019-2020), it was only somewhat higher than in a previous season with severe flu (2017-2018). The second year (2020-2021) was very harsh but far from apocalyptic – about twice as severe as 2017-2018. In both years, all-cause mortality would have been lower without lockdowns.

Over a dozen essays cover various aspects of Covid vaccines. I showed severe biases in influential studies from Israel and estimated the correct effectiveness against Covid death, which ranged from mediocre to zero or sometimes negative, in the frail elderly. Using data from the U.K., I showed the questionable effectiveness of the first booster and the futility of the second (fourth dose). In three essays, I estimated the short-term fatality rate of Covid vaccines, which was unacceptable but fortunately not as high as others had suggested. Long-term fatality is difficult to estimate. One essay describes unacceptable rates of side-effects, as found in a largely unknown official survey in Israel (‘Downplaying the Side Effects of Boosters’).

Did Covid vaccines save millions of lives? Not according to a comparative analysis of Israel with Sweden in the winter of 2020-2021 (‘Thousands of Averted Covid Deaths in Israel: Science Fiction’). Nor did they reduce the delayed death toll of Covid in Denmark (‘Lockdown and Vaccines: Lessons from Denmark’).

In the last essay, which imagines a future perspective on Covid vaccines, I wrote:

Twenty years later, we are still studying the long-term morbidity and mortality consequences of disseminated lipid nanoparticles (the mRNA carriers), self- manufactured toxic spike protein and aberrant proteins in various tissues, elevated levels of IgG4 antibodies after repeated injections, and the integration of foreign DNA fragments into the genome.

These days, a group of scientists is studying cancer cells from vaccinated patients to determine if foreign DNA is present there. Chances are that you will not find much on this topic or on other vaccine-related effects in mainstream media. So, keep following the Daily Sceptic and Brownstone, as I have been doing for a long time. No end is in sight to the saga of Covid vaccines.


UK Watchdog Accuses Pfizer of Promoting ‘Unlicensed’ COVID Vaccine on Social Media

A UK pharmaceutical watchdog said that Pfizer has breached its regulatory code five times, including “promoting an unlicensed medicine,” due to a social media post made by a Pfizer employee.

The Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) issued the ruling after receiving a complaint in February 2023 regarding a post on X that was made by a Pfizer employee in the United States.

The post included Pfizer’s press release announcing the conclusion of the Phase 3 Study of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, which was later shared by a Pfizer senior employee in the United Kingdom.

PMCPA ruled that Pfizer has breached its regulatory code, including “bringing discredit” on the pharmaceutical industry, promoting an unlicensed medicine, and making a misleading claim.

The pharmaceutical company was also accused of “making claims that did not reflect the available evidence regarding possible adverse reactions,” and failing to maintain high standards.

The complaint raised concerns about “Pfizer’s misuse of social media to misleadingly and illegally promote their COVID vaccine,” alleging that the post lacked safety information about the vaccine.

According to the complainant, “such misbehavior was even more widespread than they had thought, extended right to the top of their UK operation and was apparently continuing to this very day.”

The complainant argued that the post has remained visible on the Pfizer UK senior employee’s X feed for over two years.

“In the circumstances the complainant thought that the British public had the right to expect Pfizer UK to have conducted some sort of audit of its social media accounts (at least of its significant accounts, amongst which they would include its UK senior employees) to ensure that anything which was similarly in breach of the code was removed—even to the extent of deleting accounts if necessary. This clearly was not done,” the complaint stated.

Social Media Post Was Not Intended to Be Promotional

Pfizer told the PMCPA that it took its commitment to the regulatory code “extremely seriously” and that it had conducted a thorough investigation into the matter.
The company claimed that the post “was not intended to be promotional in nature” and that it contained “a statement of fact of the efficacy endpoints of the study.”

Pfizer also said that there was no intent by the UK senior employee to promote or to advertise its vaccine candidate, adding that the post was re-shared “in error.”

According to the company, the senior employee was an infrequent user of X and has only 321 followers, the majority of whom are professional individuals involved in, or with an interest in, the UK healthcare and research sector.

“Pfizer UK had a comprehensive policy on personal use of social media in relation to Pfizer’s business which prohibited colleagues from interacting with any social media related to Pfizer’s medicines and vaccines,” it said.

In its response to the PMCPA, Pfizer said it has taken actions to address the complaint, including issuing a UK company-wide instruction urging employees to check their social media accounts to ensure their activity complied with the Pfizer social media policy.

“Pfizer accepted that these colleagues acted in error and these errors regretfully were likely to have resulted in the promotion of an unlicensed vaccine to the UK public in a manner that was not consistent with the requirements of Clause 2,” it stated.

However, the PMCPA stated in its report that the post has resulted in “an unlicensed medicine being proactively disseminated on Twitter to health professionals and members of the public in the UK.”

The watchdog considered that the corrective and preventative actions taken following previous breaches of the code with respect to employee activity on social media “had not been implemented to the standard which was expected or required.”

It also stated that the post made no reference to adverse events of the vaccine.




Tuesday, April 09, 2024

Scientist’s Video on Vaccination Status in Pregnancy Censored for ‘Misinformation’

A mathematician has had a YouTube video taken down after pointing out that the government is counting women who had the COVID-19 vaccines before conceiving as “unvaccinated,” effectively obscuring any potential link between the jabs and negative pregnancy outcomes.

Professor Norman Fenton, who specialises in risk analysis and decision making at Queen Mary University, London, used the example of Olympic gold medal-winning cyclist, Dame Laura Kenny, who has spoken publicly about suffering a miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy.

In the video, he speculated that Dame Laura, who is married to fellow Olympic champion Sir Jason Kenny with whom she has two sons, is likely to have received two doses of the vaccines in order to be allowed to compete at the Toyko Olympics in August 2021.

Dame Laura, 31, whose first son was born in 2017, revealed she had suffered a miscarriage at nine weeks in November 2021, shortly after the delayed Tokyo games in August. She also had an ectopic pregnancy in January 2022, before going on to have her second child in July 2023.

Mr. Fenton told The Epoch Times it was not his intention to upset Dame Laura, but she had not been in touch with him to make any comment or clarification about the video.

Women Jabbed Before Pregnancy Labelled Unvaccinated

According to the way the UK Health and Security Agency (HSA) records vaccine status, if Dame Laura did not receive any COVID-19 shots during her pregnancies, she would be counted as “unvaccinated” along with the “never vaccinated” women, even if she had received the jabs before conceiving.

Mr. Fenton said, “The way they were doing that particular pregnancy statistic is one of the worst examples of data obfuscation—to lump the never vaccinated in with the vaccinated, who in theory could have been vaccinated a day before (they got pregnant) is absolutely outrageous.”

“If there is a safety signal, it would just be hidden. You wouldn’t see it.”

In the video, he said: “She would’ve had to be double vaxxed shortly before the games to be allowed to take part. While there may be no reason to suspect this had anything to do with Laura’s two unfortunate outcomes, both would be classified in the UKHSA ‘no doses in pregnancy’ category.”

Mr. Fenton posted the censored video on YouTube at 5:30 p.m. on Good Friday, where he said it received 2,000 views within an hour. The platform took the video down after just 80 minutes, claiming it was a violation of its policy on “medical misinformation.”

‘Obfuscating Possible Vaccine Adverse Reactions’

YouTube said the “violation” occurred at three minutes and 47 seconds into the video, when Mr. Fenton said, “Once again we are reminded not just of the extent to which the government has gone to obfuscate possible vaccine adverse reactions, but also the insanity that led to the strongest and fittest people in Great Britain being forced to take a useless vaccine that they never needed and for which—even then—there were many known safety signals, and even to this day, the full vaccine pregnancy safety data has never been released.”

The platform sent Mr. Fenton a message saying he had been censored because anything that contravenes advice by the World Health Organisation is considered to be “medical misinformation.”

The British Olympic Association (BOA) said in May 2021 that “all athletes and support staff will be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 before leaving for Japan ahead of this year’s Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games.”

“The BOA is set to secure the vaccines after the International Olympic Committee struck a deal with Pfizer BioNtech to donate doses to athletes heading to the Games.”

Mr. Fenton shared the video on other platforms, including Odyssey, Rumble, and Bitchute.

Dame Laura is the most successful British female Olympian of all time, with only her husband, Sir Jason, and fellow cyclist Chris Hoy winning more gold medals. She retired from the track in March 2024, having suffered a series of injury problems as well as becoming a mother for the second time.

She shared her sadness over her baby losses in an Instagram post in April 2022, revealing that she had conceived just after the Tokyo games.

“Since the Olympics we haven’t had much luck and it’s been the hardest few months I’ve ever had to go through,” she wrote.

“Jason and I fell pregnant immediately after the Games and we were absolutely chuffed to bits. But unfortunately in November when commentating at the track champions league I miscarried our baby at nine weeks. I’ve never felt so lost and sad. It felt like a part of me had been torn away.”

“I then caught COVID in mid-January and found myself feeling really very unwell. I didn’t have typical COVID symptoms and I just felt I needed to go to hospital. A day later I found myself in A&E being rushed to theatre because I was having an ectopic pregnancy. Scared doesn’t even come close. I lost a fallopian tube that day.”

The government maintains the jabs are “safe and effective” for everyone, including for pregnant women, in spite of concerns raised by doctors and in several studies that women were suffering menstrual irregularities and linking the jabs to higher rates of miscarriage.

A peer-reviewed report from February suggests mRNA in the vaccines does not remain at the injection site but can “spread systemically” to the placenta and umbilical cord blood of the fetus.

The HSA said in a statement to The Epoch Times it has worked with a range of partners, “to document the benefits and safety of vaccination with respect to pregnancy, with surveillance clearly suggesting that women who have been vaccinated (both before and during pregnancy) have better COVID-19 disease outcomes than unvaccinated women for themselves, the pregnancy and for their baby.”

“The vaccination in pregnancy table in the UKHSA COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report were set up to compare the rate of adverse outcomes in women who received the vaccine during pregnancy with those who had not received the vaccine during pregnancy.

“As the report sets out these rates were estimated for “women giving birth between [the report dates], who received one or more COVID-19 vaccination doses during their pregnancy compared with those who did not (either because they were unvaccinated or had only received vaccine doses prior to pregnancy).”

The HSA pointed to research done by the University of Edinburgh, and added: “More detailed analysis taking other factors into account, including timing of vaccination, as published for Scotland, is underway.”

In its latest COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report, published in January this year, the HSA said that pregnant women are still advised to have booster shots and that this is “strongly recommended” by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives.

‘A Statistical Illusion’

Mr. Fenton referred to the “statistical illusion” of many studies which claim to show the jabs are “safe and effective” by miscategorising partially vaccinated people as unjabbed.
He and two other academics carried out a study—accepted as a pre-print but not yet peer-reviewed—in which they examine such “miscategorisation bias” across 39 papers.

“We’ve been arguing that most of these big, well cited studies that claim 95 percent efficacy and that the vaccines are saving lives, anything claiming vaccine efficacy published in the big journals, every time we have looked at them, there [are] systemic flaws in them.

“The most common one is the miscategorisation one, where they are simply classifying people who had got COVID and hadn’t had every booster shot as unvaccinated, which obviously creates bias where you could show efficacy even with a placebo.”

“In some cases, we have written to the journals asking them to either make a clarification or correction to the paper, but they never did.”


Some Questions Australia’s COVID-19 Inquiries Must Ask

The Australian Senate will soon release its report on the proper terms of reference for a COVID Royal Commission to be established in 2024.

During the inquiry, held by the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, a large volume of submissions were submitted, while the government’s own COVID-19 Response Inquiry received over 2,000 submissions.

This indicates high public interest in getting to the truth of what happened, why particular decisions were made, and what the right lessons for the future.

This is especially important so Australia can be better prepared next time and also to put the WHO’s new pandemic accords in perspective.

Contrary to dire warnings, there have been only five pandemics in the last 105 years: the Spanish, Asian, Hong Kong, swine flus, and COVID-19.

In that time, great strides in medical knowledge, training, and technology have expanded disease response toolkits along the spectrum of prevention, treatment, and palliative care.

Average life expectancy has improved dramatically as a result. Countries have exchanged best practices on disease prevention and management.

Despite these gains in understanding and treatment protocols, when COVID-19 struck, many countries including Australia abandoned existing well-prepared plans to deal with pandemics, and instead, reacted with panic.

This is never a good basis on which to make either individual or public policy decisions.

Yet the public health messaging deliberately tried to spread panic to the population to increase compliance with pandemic management measures.

The herd panic of early 2020 led to an abandonment of good process, an abandonment of preparedness plans, and a centralisation of decision-making in a narrow circle of heads of government, ministers, and health experts.

The damage to physical health, mental health, social, educational, and economic problems will continue to impact public life for many years into the future.

Did Australia’s COVID-19 policy interventions represent the greatest triumph of public policy, with an unprecedentedly high number of lives saved as a result of timely, decisive, and appropriate measures instituted by governments acting on the science- and evidence-based advice of experts?

Or will they prove to be the biggest public policy disaster of all time?

Why Were Established Practices Swept Aside?

These are big questions that deserve a rigorous, independent, and impartial inquiry.

The first question is: why exactly were the existing pandemic preparedness plans and medical decision-making practices abandoned?

Suspect data from one city, Wuhan, in one country should not have been deemed sufficient to overturn a century of data, experience, and scientific research.

In particular, rather than responding to herd panic elsewhere to order mass house arrests for the entire population, did Australian scientists and public health officials test overseas claims against hard data locally on the extent, virulence, and lethality (the infection and case fatality rates) of the new virus?

Until these facts, as they apply to Australia, are authoritatively and credibly elucidated by a duly-empowered independent inquiry, public trust in health experts and institutions is unlikely to be restored to pre-pandemic levels.

How Was the Threat Level Assessed?

Another set of questions is about assessing the threat of a disease outbreak against other killer diseases, and the opportunity costs of allocating human, financial, and hospital resources to the different health risks.

The standard metric used to assess one side of this equation is the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) measure that, logically and sensibly, holds that the death of a healthy child, adolescent or young person is a greater tragedy and loss to society than that of someone above the average life expectancy.

From the start, it was known that the average death of those dying with COVID was higher than the average life expectancy.

That being the case, were standard cost-benefit analyses undertaken of the different policy interventions, including the risks of side effects and collateral harms?

If so, why were they not published? If not, why not?

More here: