Categories
Biden Pandemic Commentary COVID Politics Reprints from others. Tony the Fauch

Who Best Avoided the COVID Religion?

One of the greatest contributions that America gave to the world was and is religious freedom. In 2020, that freedom was taken away from all religions in the United States. We’ve not yet come to terms with this awful reality and what it means for the future of faith.

The lockdowns were a major blow to religious institutions and practices. Every major survey shows that attendance at weekly religious services is down from pre-lockdown times.

“The share of all U.S. adults who say they typically attend religious services at least once a month is down modestly but measurably (by 3 percentage points, from 33 percent to 30 percent) over that span,” writes Pew, “and one in five Americans say they now attend in person less often than they did before the pandemic.”

 

I’ve had this confirmed by many friends who report that the religious houses of their choice seem to show far less participation. This very likely translates to a decline in financial support too. Once people got out of the habit of participating in a physical church, the ritual was broken and now we see the spreading of indifference. This is surely not a good sign.

But that picture is complicated by a strange feature: the religious congregations that resisted COVID controls and shutdowns have likely earned the trust and loyalty of their members. Indeed, this weekend, I happened to attend the debut of a new opera where attendance was dominated by what are called “traditionalist” Catholics. Talking with people after, I was thrilled to learn just how many of their congregations never closed down.

A priest friend of mine in the Midwest tells the story of Easter 2020, when almost every church in the country was closed. That’s an outrage, by the way. It’s a devastating commentary on the Catholic Bishops that they uttered no protest against this. It’s a black mark against an entire generation of Church leadership.

My priest friend, however, stood up to his own Bishop and said he would sooner resign his post as pastor than lock his own parishioners out of church on Holy Week.

“You are bluffing,” the Bishop said.

“Try me,” the priest answered.

The Bishop could not afford to take the chance of losing this man because his parish had a very large school and was thriving. So the meeting broke up with the Bishop neither given permission nor refusing it. The parish allowed parishioners to come in the back entrance where the media was not on the lookout, and they kept the lights in the building very low so as not to attract government officials.

Services went on. The parishioners have not forgotten this act of bravery and increased their participation and financial support in gratitude. The priest was tested and showed that he took seriously the Gospel message. He was not going to throw away the words of Jesus that wherever two or three gather in his name, there is God.

There is nothing in the Gospels about social distancing, much less mRNA jabs as a moral imperative.

Jesus ate with the lepers but Fauci told us not to get near each other because of a virus circulating with a 99 percent and higher survival rate, even while he was banning therapeutics and killing people with ventilators and toxic pharmaceuticals.

Those who trusted Jesus over Fauci have earned the respect of their congregations. But there is even more to it than that.

There is something about a very strong religious faith that protected people against government propaganda in those times. They could see straight through the lies even as more secular people, in general, went for the government-pushed baloney.

Think back to those times. Who resisted? Certainly, the traditional Catholics did, more than a few of them devoted to the older form of liturgy with Latin and all the smells and bells. They teach a stricter doctrine about sin and salvation than you get from the watered-down version in modern parish life. Those people were certainly among the resistance to government decrees.

It was the same with Jewish congregations. The typical Reform, Conservative, and Modern Orthodox temples and synagogues shut down and went to Zoom. This infuriated people and alienated them from their place of worship. But in many communities called “ultra-Orthodox” or Hasidic, among others, there was indefatigable resistance.

Indeed, both the governor and mayor of New York dared blame these faithful Jews for the spreading of disease. The New York Times agreed completely, despite how this claim revived one of the more grotesque smears of the Jews from the Middle Ages.

The Amish never paid the slightest attention to the disease frenzy that shut down the rest of society. In the Anabaptist tradition, which also includes the Mennonites, there is no real distinction between the community, the way of life, and the functioning of the place of worship. It is all in unity in both belief and practice. And so there simply was never a chance that these people would stop worshiping God in the way their tradition demands.

It was all true of many break-off sects of the so-called Mormons. Outside the confines of the official church that is forever seeking the respectability of the media and secular elites, these communities continued right on with their practices. And why not? Their whole lives are defined by the choice to believe and live in a certain way. Some hysterical screaming from D.C. and the media elites are not going to shake them from something much more fundamental: the relationship of their members to their God.

The evangelicals were a bit slow to catch on to the scam that was the lockdowns, but they figured it out too, many by the summer of 2020, and they started holding weddings and funerals. Regular weekly services returned to the howls of the media hounds, but they didn’t care. Once they had shaken off their fears, they were ready to get back to their religious obligations.

Tellingly, it was the more secular areas of the country that stayed closed longer. And the mainline Protestant and Catholic churches proved themselves all too willing to go along with the demands that they shut down services because of Fauci’s diktats.

For most of 2020 and 2021, many of these churches simply kept their doors closed or forcibly masked their parishioners. Horribly, some of them even went along with the vaccine mandate, not only for staff but parishioners, too.

“Nationwide, a number of churches and synagogues are implementing vaccine mandates,” wrote the Deseret News in September 2021. “Some are requiring not just clergy and staff to get vaccinated but even congregants. Grace Cathedral, an Episcopal church in San Francisco, California, is enforcing such an all encompassing mandate — complete with ushers who will politely turn away those without proof of vaccination.”

I’m not saying that such churches deserve to go out of business, but … actually, such churches deserve to go out of business.

What have we learned? People who take their faith seriously have proven that they are more immune to the lies of the secular elites than those who barely go through the motions. It’s the hardcore among them who put God ahead of government, their teachings ahead of the media, and their personal convictions ahead of the biomedical elite and their bogus claims.

In other words, it was faith itself that enabled people to follow real science better than those who outsourced their hearts and salvation to pharmaceutical companies and government bureaucrats. In other words, it was the people of firm religious conviction who proved to be better practitioners of both science and human values.

Think what that means in terms of the history of science and faith. For centuries, we’ve been told that only faithless rationalism provides a true guide to truth, while faith is merely a superstitious distraction. There are perhaps some valid historical reasons for this bias—certainly, the union of church and state was not good for religion or civic community—but the truth is more complicated.

The last three years have shown that this claim might be completely inverted. It is faith that allows people clarity to see through government propaganda and inspires people with moral conviction to do what is right regardless of what a totalitarian government happens to be preaching at any one time.

In the end, it was Fauci and the whole COVID regime that was the superstitious distraction, while robust and traditional religion provided the best guide to light and truth.

(This post has been copy-edited to correct grammatical errors. No content was deleted.)

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Drugs Medicine Reprints from others.

Tale of two Covid strains: EG.5 & new BA.2.86 variant – more likely to affect the Vaxxed (Hmm.)

COVID is on the rise again: Here’s why you shouldn’t panic

What you need to know about the latest variant, how to protect yourself, and how to treat it if you do get sick.

Yusuf JP Saleeby MD  Dr. Keith Berkowitz  and the FLCCC Alliance  Aug 21, 2023

A new COVID variant is gaining ground in the United States. You’ve probably been hearing about it in the news, and we’ve certainly been seeing it in our patients in recent weeks. Here’s what you need to know about it, how to protect yourself, and how to treat it if you do get sick.

First of all, DO NOT PANIC.

EG.5 — also known as the “Eris” variant — certainly seems to be highly contagious, but from what we’re seeing it is less virulent. In other words, it’s a lot like the Omicron variants we’ve seen recently — lots of cases, but not a lot of extreme illness or hospitalization.

If you’ve been exposed to the virus before, you likely have some natural ability to fight it off. We are finding that patients who have not been previously exposed are the ones hit hardest right now.

That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t take steps to protect yourself. The good news is that the advice we’ve been sharing from the FLCCC all along still stands — do what you can to prevent getting ill (more on that below) and if you do get it, treat immediately. Early treatment is critical.

Common symptoms

The symptoms of this latest wave are like other respiratory illnesses, and include things like dry cough, sore throat, conjunctivitis, headache, skin rashes, diarrhea, and fever. However, we have been noticing a few unique symptoms, including:

  • Nasal congestion and sinus pain
  • Dental pain and soreness of gums and teeth
  • Puffy face
  • Swelling and/or pain related to the orbit of the eye
  • Malaise and muscle pain
  • Tiredness and fatigue

There is no need to wait for a confirmed PCR test to begin treatment if these symptoms arise. The tests were developed for older variants and reliability was mixed at best. Tests can be negative for days until a positive result appears, and that is valuable time lost. If you begin to experience any of the symptoms listed above, start treatment immediately. If you need a healthcare provider, check the FLCCC directory.

If you have difficulty breathing or shortness of breath (dyspnea), chest pain or chest pressure, or lost motor skills or the ability to speak, seek medical attention immediately.

In terms of a treatment strategy, we want to start with killing the virus in the upper respiratory system. Nasal rinses and nose or throat sprays are effective for this. We have advice on this in the I-CARE: Early COVID treatment protocol. This should be paired with systemic antivirals like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

Next, it is important to take a range of supplements that help boost the immune system. This includes things like: Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Quercetin with bromelain, N-acetyl cysteine, Probiotics, Omega-3 fatty acids, Melatonin (slow release is best), Zinc (taken with Quercetin), Selenium, and Andrographis.

If you are symptomatic, try a low-histamine diet that cuts out foods like sauerkraut and other fermented foods, alcohol, processed meat, aged cheese, certain types of fish and shellfish, and nightshade vegetables like tomato and eggplant.

If you’ve been following FLCCC for a while, much of this will sound familiar. Our early treatment protocol is still the right place to start when COVID comes to call.

Prevent illness in the first place

While we’re at it, let’s talk about getting your immune system into shape, and other evasive actions you can take to make sure you’re strong, healthy, and ready to fight off any virus coming your way this fall.

  • Follow our prevention protocol: Some easy things you can do include mouthwash and nasal spray, zinc supplements, Vitamins C and D, melatonin, quercetin or resveratrol, and elderberry.
  • Clean up your diet: It almost goes without saying, but what you eat and when you eat it has a profound effect on your overall health. Intermittent fasting and balancing your gut microbiome are key.
  • Get enough Vitamin D: There is a clear link between low vitamin D levels and the risk of infections and other illnesses. Fortunately, boosting your vitamin D with supplementation is fairly easy and inexpensive.
  • Reduce stress: Too much stress can create hormonal and other imbalances that suppress your immune system. Incorporate stress-reduction techniques into your daily routine for your overall well-being and to ensure you’re prepared to fight off infection.
  • Get good sleep: Sleep recharges your body so your systems can function properly. On average, adults need between seven and nine hours of sleep each night.
  • Get outside and get some fresh air: Spending about 30 minutes outdoors each day can help the skin synthesize vitamin D, and sunlight has many other great therapeutic powers too.

Many people have asked whether they should start up a prophylactic treatment of ivermectin again. On that front, our advice has not really changed: if you have significant comorbidities, lack natural immunity, or have a suppressed immune system you may want to try a twice-weekly dose of ivermectin at 0.2 mg/kg. Likewise, consider it if you are currently suffering from long COVID or post-vaccine syndrome and are not currently being treated with ivermectin. If you have an upcoming situation where you may have high possible exposure — such as travel, weddings, or conferences — taking daily ivermectin starting two days before departure and either daily or every other day during the period of high exposure is a reasonable approach.

Remember to immediately initiate daily ivermectin at treatment doses (0.4 mg/kg) at the first signs of any kind of viral syndrome. It bears repeating: Early treatment is essential!

Most of all, pay no mind to the ongoing drumbeat of fear-mongering that the mainstream media is providing. We know the routine. We’ve been here before.

The information in this article is a recommended approach to preventing and treating COVID-19 infections in adults. Patients should always consult with a trusted healthcare provider before starting any medical treatment.


New COVID Variant More Likely to Infect Vaccinated

vial of blood labeled 'New Variant'

Wednesday, 23 August 2023

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said on Wednesday the new BA.2.86 lineage of coronavirus may be more capable than older variants in causing infection in people who have previously had COVID-19 or who have received vaccines.

CDC said it was too soon to know whether this might cause more severe illness compared with previous variants.

But due to the high number of mutations detected in this lineage, there were concerns about its impact on immunity from vaccines and previous infections, the agency said.

Scientists are keeping an eye on the BA.2.86 lineage because it has 36 mutations that distinguish it from the currently-dominant XBB.1.5 variant.

CDC, however, said virus samples are not yet broadly available for more reliable laboratory testing of antibodies.

The agency had earlier this month said it was tracking the highly mutated BA.2.86 lineage, which has been detected in the United States, Denmark and Israel.

CDC said on Wednesday the current increase in hospitalizations in the United States is not likely driven by the BA.2.86 lineage.

 

Categories
Biden Pandemic Child Abuse COVID Drugs Links from other news sources. Medicine

Damning Life Insurance Data PROVES Far More Young People Are Dying — And It’s NOT from COVID

Damning Life Insurance Data PROVES Far More Young People Are Dying — And It’s NOT from COVID

When data speaks, we must listen.

Thanks to Vigilant Fox

When data speaks, we must listen. And statistics from the Society of Actuaries reveal a harrowing health crisis in the American youth. While most of the attention has been directed towards the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences, there’s an underreported situation emerging — a rise in the mortality rate of younger individuals. Disturbingly, these figures can’t solely be attributed to COVID-19 — far from it.

According to the data reported by the Society of Actuaries, which conducts research for the insurance industry, there is a concerning trend in deaths among the young. Much of this data comes from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which has limitations with respect to data collection and transparency.

Actual-to-Expected (A/E) Death Ratios

To understand the gravity of the situation, retired nurse educator and respected medical figure Dr. John Campbell, walked through the Society of Actuaries data actual-to-expected (A/E) death ratios. The “actual” part of the ratio is the number of deaths that were actually recorded, and the “expected” part of the ratio refers to the number of deaths we would expect to see – using a 2015 to 2019 baseline.

Between April to December 2020, during the peak of the pandemic, the A/E ratio was 122%. This means there were 22% more deaths than expected. Excess mortality for all of 2020, including January to March, was recorded at 16.4%. 13.3% of the excess deaths were attributed to COVID, and 3.1% of the excess deaths were not. This makes sense because, at the time, there were no “miracle vaccines” to save us.

Fast forward to 2021, a year when vaccines were touted as our saving grace. The A/E ratio was at 117%, nearly mirroring 2020’s figures. Logic would suggest that with the rollout of vaccines, mortality rates, especially those related to COVID, should have declined. But they didn’t. And when it comes to non-COVID deaths, 15 to 34-year-olds saw a staggering 21.4% increase in excess deaths in 2021.

2022, primarily characterized by the less-severe Omicron variant, should have witnessed a sharp drop in excess mortality given the less virulent strain and increased vaccination rates. Instead, data up to March 2022 indicated an A/E ratio of 115% — and this figure excluded COVID deaths. Given this, one is compelled to infer that something went deeply wrong with pandemic measures. Most worrying, deaths among 35 to 44-year-olds, between October and December 2022, surged an alarming 34% above the expected 2015 to 2019 baseline.

Looking at graphical representations, particularly among males and females aged 15 to 34, the numbers stay consistently above the expected baselines. What’s more concerning is that these figures can’t solely be attributed to a lack of access to healthcare, as some pundits suggest. If this were the primary factor, the oldest age groups, more reliant on medical care, would see the highest excess deaths. Instead, it’s the younger and, often, healthier age ranges witnessing the most significant surges. The mainstream narrative is just not making sense.

So, what’s happening?

Edward Dowd, former Blackrock asset manager and data analyst, asserts in his book, “Cause Unknown”: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 & 2022, that the so-called COVID vaccines are behind it.

Dowd’s book has thoroughly compiled headline after headline, of young people suddenly dying of an “unknown” cause. What you’re about to watch in the video below is young and healthy people, in the prime of their lives, suddenly and unexpectedly collapsing and dying. And this is just from the past eight months…

View it on the Vigilant FOX Page: –TPR

During the pandemic, we were told the measures were about “health” and “saving lives.” But in the midst of a major health crisis among young and working-aged people, health authorities are radio silent. Why is that? And why does no one seem to care what’s causing it? Because while COVID-19 is now well behind us, a more insidious health crisis is unfolding right before our eyes.

Dr. John Campbell’s full presentation on this subject is available in the video below:

video
play-sharp-fill

See full article Here

Related

Categories
Biden Pandemic Corruption COVID Drugs Reprints from others.

‘Stay Protected’: CDC Doubles Down on Plans to Recommend Annual COVID-19 Shots

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is still planning on recommending people receive a COVID-19 shot on an annual basis, the agency’s director says.

“We are likely to see this as a recommendation for an annual COVID shot, just like we have an annual flu shot,” Dr. Mandy Cohen, the director, said in a podcast episode released on Aug. 9. “And I think that will give more folks clarity about should they get one or not, because the answer is like, ‘Well, did you get one this year? If not, go get the new COVID shot.’”

She said that the CDC will likely make the recommendation in the coming weeks.

“This will be an annual vaccine … to make sure that you stay protected,” Dr. Cohen said.

Dr. Cohen was commenting after Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, questioned her over what data would support annual shots and asked for a briefing on the matter.

Dr. Wenstrup gave the CDC until Aug. 16 to provide answers. The agency has not done so yet, a spokesperson for the panel said.

Dr. Cohen had said in July, in one of her first interviews after becoming the CDC’s director, that the agency was poised to recommend annual shots.

Waning Immunity

U.S. officials initially said people would only need a primary series to protect themselves against COVID-19 but in 2021, less than a year after recommending vaccination for virtually everyone, they authorized and advised boosters to try to stem waning immunity.

As newer variants have emerged, the vaccines have performed even worse, leading to recommendations for additional boosters and, in the fall of 2022, the clearance of updated bivalent shots from Pfizer and Moderna. Those shots later replaced the companies’ old vaccines.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which decides whether to clear vaccines, said in June that it was directing Pfizer and other manufacturers to update the shots again to target the XBB.1.5 strain because the vaccines “appear less effective against currently circulating variants (e.g., XBB-lineage viruses) than against previous strains of virus.”

But XBB.1.5 has already been largely displaced by other variants, including EG.5. That undercuts the new strategy, Dr. Harvey Risch told The Epoch Times in an email.

“The boosters will be out-of-date before they are even released,” Dr. Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, said. “As well, CDC has already said that efficacy of new boosters in preventing spread is transient and wanes, thus there is little reason to see the boosters as beneficial.”

A CDC spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email: “Dr. Cohen’s expert opinion is based on the science, which indicates that vaccine-induced immunity wanes and the COVID-19 virus is likely to continue to evolve. As she has said before, if the science changes, the agency will adapt its recommendations.”

The COVID-19 vaccines have never been 100 percent effective. No trial efficacy data exists for the currently available vaccines, but observational data indicate they provide transient protection against infection and severe illness, even turning negative after several months.

There is no evidence supporting the idea that the shots provide protection for one year.

“Federal mandates did not stop the spread or transmission of the COVID-19 virus. Should the CDC issue a recommendation for an annual COVID-19 vaccine, it will mark a significant change in federal policy and guidance regarding the COVID-19 vaccines and how they are utilized,” a spokesperson for the House panel told The Epoch Times via email. “Serious questions remain as to whether the science would support such a recommendation.”

In support of the planned recommendation, the CDC pointed to a modeling study and a series of other studies highlighting waning immunity from the original shots, all of which were based on data from 2022 and earlier. The agency also cited a study that found the currently available boosters did not produce “robust neutralization” against newer variants.

Some of the papers concluded that people with so-called hybrid immunity, or vaccination on top of natural immunity, have the best protection. Other research has found that the latter protection, derived from recovering from COVID-19, is as good as or better than that from vaccines, though little data is available from recent months.

Timeline

Executives with Pfizer and Novavax have said they expect the FDA to authorize the new shots by the end of August. Moderna also makes a COVID-19 vaccine. Johnson & Johnson’s shot is no longer authorized.

After the FDA authorizes the latest formulations, the U.S. government plans to phase out the older shots. according to a planning document from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the parent agency of both the FDA and the CDC.

The FDA has indicated it will not require trial efficacy data before authorizing the new shots but will monitor observational data, similar to its stance on the influenza vaccines.

After the authorizations, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the CDC’s vaccine advisers, plans to meet to discuss for whom they will advise the CDC to recommend the shots. The CDC does not have to accept the advice, but often does.

“The FDA anticipates taking timely action to authorize or approve updated COVID-19 vaccines in order to make vaccines available this fall. After their authorization or approval, ACIP will meet to make a recommendation outlining use of these updated vaccines this fall,” the CDC spokesperson said.

The CDC has recommended, including in its latest slate of recommendations, that virtually every person receive a primary series. The CDC did ease up on booster recommendations in the most recent recommendations, saying some people did not need additional shots, in the first formal recognition of the high levels of natural immunity in the population.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Crime Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science Uncategorized

Just putting this out there. Fauci successor at NIAID peddled dangerous Remdesivir drug as ‘silver bullet’ against Covid-19 Dr. Jeanne Marrazzo tried to use unsafe antiviral IV drug on every covid hospitalized patient at UAB.

Just putting this out there. Fauci successor at NIAID peddled dangerous Remdesivir drug as ‘silver bullet’ against Covid-19 Dr. Jeanne Marrazzo tried to use unsafe antiviral IV drug on every covid hospitalized patient at UAB.

Dr. Jeanne Marrazzo, the newly minted successor to Dr Anthony Fauci at the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), was recently one of America’s chief hype women for an antiviral drug that is now unanimously considered an unsafe and catastrophically failed treatment for Covid-19.

Prior to moving to her Government Health post, Marrazzo was the longtime director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB).

In partnership with Big Pharma drugmaker Gilead, UAB played a major role in the research and development of Remdesivir. The drug was developed over a decade ago with the hopes to treat Hepatitis C and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), but was suddenly repurposed to “treat” Covid-19 when coronavirus hysteria reached the United States.

Given the UAB-Gilead partnership, one would think that Dr. Marrazzo would refrain from commenting on issues through which she maintained a clear conflict of interest. Or at the very least, she had the duty to disclose her conflict of interest when speaking to the media about the UAB-developed “wonder drug.” She did no such thing.

Even worse, Dr. Marrazzo bashed harmless and low cost alternatives like hydroxychloroquine, while hyping the super expensive Gilead-UAB competitor drug.

“The hope was maybe, if you treat early in the disease, you don’t need a silver bullet” such as remdesivir, she told The Washington Post in a July 2020 piece. “Hospitals are on the razor’s edge,” she added, contributing to the fear and paranoia that was enveloping the nation at the time.

In interview after interview, Dr. Marrazzo had nothing but good things to say about remdesivir, despite the incredible lack of data available to support her outandish claims about the drug.

On social media, Marrazzo lavished endless praise upon Remdesivir, declaring it the best agent against coronavirus disease, and boasting that her hospital tries to use it on every covid-hospitalized patient.

“We don’t have enough remdesivir to treat everybody who’s in the hospital,” she said in a late 2020 news conference about the state of her hospital system. “It’s a really challenging situation.”

Her predecessor at the NIAID, Mr Fauci, infamously paraded Remdesivir as the “standard of care” for Covid-19 treatment, adding that it can “block the virus.”

Unsupported pseudoscientific claims about very expensive drugs (a full course of remdesivir costs the patient thousands of dollars) is nothing new for NIAID officials, who, under Fauci’s leadership, have created an agency that acts as a government marketing department for pharmaceutical companies.

Undoubtedly, Marrazzo’s Remdesivir maximalism had disastrous implications for patients hospitalized at UAB. The so-called silver bullet later took on a morbid nickname, “run, death is near,” because of the severe side effect portfolio associated with the IV drug.

The headlines speak for themselves:

Remdesivir not only failed, but actively harmed hospitalized patients, who were being injected with the antiviral agent following the recommendations of Dr. Marrazzo.

The most exhaustive studies on the Gilead-UAB drug show that there are zero clinical benefits to injecting patients with remdesivir. Many studies show that Remdesivir can severely injure vital organs such as the heart and kidneys.

Dr. Marrazzo has never publicly expressed remorse for her longtime promotion of the drug she once described as a “silver bullet” against Covid-19. She last promoted the unsafe drug in December, 2021, long after most hospital systems stopped treating patients with the Gilead-UAB disaster drug.

Categories
COVID Drugs Medicine Reprints from others. Science

Pfizer and Moderna dodge questions and plead ignorance at Aussie Senate hearing

By Maryanne Demasi, PhD

Last week during an Australian Senate committee hearing, Pfizer and Moderna executives were grilled under oath about covid-19 vaccine policies and vaccine safety.

Tensions were high during the public hearing, which was live-streamed via the parliamentary website.

Senators fired questions at Pfizer and Moderna executives who responded by dodging questions and refusing to take accountability for their failures.

To complicate matters, the drug company executives did not attend the hearing in-person, only via video link allowing them to plead ignorance about the studies that were presented during the inquiry.

At the commencement, the Chair warned the witnesses against giving “false or misleading evidence” and after opening statements by Pfizer and Moderna, the floor was opened to questions.

Stopping transmission

Senator Matt Canavan began question time and was laser-focused on the issue of viral transmission.

“Did Pfizer test whether your covid-19 vaccine could stop or reduce the transmission of the virus before its approval and rollout in late 2020,” asked Canavan pointedly.

Pfizer Australia’s medical director Krishan Thiru was evasive.

Left to right: Brian Hewitt, Director of Regulatory Affairs, Pfizer Australia; Krishan Thiru, Medical Director, Pfizer Australia

“To bring this vaccine to patients we were required to show that the vaccine was safe and effective…The primary purpose of vaccination was, and remains, to protect the person who received the vaccine,” said Thiru.

Canavan reminded him that Pfizer’s own CEO Anthony Bourla told a reporter on NBC news on Dec 3, 2020, that it was “not certain” if vaccinated people could catch and spread the virus, but Thiru kept repeating the mantra, “the vaccine is safe and effective.”

Canavan persisted, citing Pfizer’s official tweet on Jan 14, 2023, stating its highest priority was its “ability to vaccinate at speed to gain herd immunity and stop transmission,” and then on June 8, 2021, Bourla tweeted, “the vaccine was a critical tool to help stop transmission.”

“What evidence did Pfizer have to make that public statement to imply that vaccination could stop transmission?” asked Canavan.

Thiru pleaded ignorance saying he was not familiar with the context of the tweets and took the question on notice (to respond later in writing).

Canavan explained that federal and state governments had imposed vaccine mandates based on the evidence and advice from the manufacturers that claimed the vaccines could “stop the spread.”

Canavan also pointed to the Doherty Modelling report submitted to national cabinet in Nov 2021 that underpinned the government’s decision to impose mandates in late 2021, but again, Pfizer could not confirm whether it was consulted about the modelling.

Hewitt said, “I can’t answer that question” and took it on notice.

Moderna Executive Director of Medical Affairs for Respiratory Vaccines Rachel Dawson, said that in the phase III pivotal trials of 2020, its mRNA vaccine showed that it could reduce symptomatic infection, and that it could “make an important contribution to reducing viral transmission.”

Dawson cited real world data demonstrating that the spread of the virus was reduced in households among vaccinated individuals and that they had a “lower viral load.”

But to this day, the US regulator says the ability of Moderna’s mRNA vaccine to reduce transmission remains unproven. “While it is hoped this will be the case, the scientific community does not yet know if Spikevax will reduce such transmission,” states the FDA.

Canavan said Moderna’s evidence, “just doesn’t seem to stack up”.

“Politicians told us it will stop the spread. Clearly that hasn’t happened. Do you have a simple explanation for why very high rates of vaccination, higher than anyone expected (90%) in this country, has clearly not stopped the spread of coronavirus,” asked Canavan.

But Moderna avoided the question on transmission, presumably because it would undermine the entire argument that vaccine mandates “keep others safe,” and instead, referred to its scripted statement that “the goal of vaccination is to prevent severe infection in hospitals.”

Preventing infection

Senator Gerard Rennick then proceeded to challenge Pfizer on its claim that the vaccine was “100% effective at preventing covid-19 cases,” a statement that Bourla tweeted on April 2, 2021.

Rennick proceeded to explain why the statement was implausible. 

“By September 2022, Australia had recorded 10 million cases of COVID despite having an adult population vaccinated to the tune of 95% so given those real world figures in Australia, do you still stand by that statement?” said Rennick.

But Thiru responded repeatedly, “we strongly believe, and we reiterate, that the vaccine is safe and effective for its intended use” saying that Pfizer’s vaccine remained highly effective prior to the emergence of variants.

When Rennick asked Pfizer for its definition of “highly effective” in terms of duration, Thiru responded saying, “When the wild-type virus was prevalent, efficacy of approximately or greater than 90% was maintained at six months for illness and severe disease.”

But regulatory filings clearly show Pfizer had strong evidence by April 2021 that its vaccine’s efficacy waned, and withheld the data from the public for months.

Claiming that vaccine efficacy was 90% after six months following vaccination is misleading because that figure is largely driven by the first couple months of the trial when there was still a placebo group. Had people stayed in the trial for the whole duration of the 6 months, the average overall, would have been lower.

Lack of studies

Senator Rennick proceeded to read out the TGA’s non-clinical report listing all the safety studies in animals that were not carried out prior to testing in humans.

Despite assurances that “no corners were cut,” there were no carcinogenic tests, genotoxicity tests, immunotoxicity tests, duration studies, interaction studies with other medicines, and the list went on.

Again, Thiru predictably answered, “I don’t have that report in front of me, so I’m afraid I can’t talk to that.”

When Rennick asked directly if any studies were omitted or circumvented entirely to achieve the accelerated time frame for vaccine development, Pfizer objected saying its process was “thorough and comprehensive”.

Safety problems

Senator Rennick asked if Pfizer had determined the mechanism for why its vaccine could cause myocarditis and pericarditis, but Thiru was defiant saying that Pfizer had “strong confidence in the safety profile” of its vaccine.

Rennick would not let up. “I want you to explain to me why it causes myocarditis,’ he asked several times.

Thiru conceded that Pfizer was aware of “very rare” reports of myocarditis and pericarditis temporally associated with vaccination, but could not explain the mechanism, instead opting to take the question on notice again.

Senator Alex Antic challenged Pfizer on the Fraiman re-analysis, which found one additional SAE for every 800 people vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine, but his attempts hit a brick wall.

Senator Pauline Hansen chimed in, noting the Fraiman re-analysis found a “36% increase in serious adverse events. The most common were coagulation disorders, including thrombosis, and acute cardiac injury. In every 10,000 people injected 18 will experience a life threatening or altering medical complication,” said Hansen.

Again, Thiru pleaded ignorance. “I do not have a copy of your paper. I have not examined it,” he said, “the benefit risk ratio for vaccination remains strongly positive in all indications, all age groups for which it has been approved.”

Senator Hansen became visually frustrated.

“You haven’t read up on all of this, have you?” she said angrily, “You’ve come to this inquiry and you haven’t done anything whatsoever to respond to our questions. I think it’s very poor of you to not be able to answer these questions.”

When it was Moderna’s turn to respond to the Fraiman re-analysis, they too, said they were not aware of it.

Senator Antic asked Moderna what its overall rate of SAEs was for its mRNA vaccine and how that compared to routine vaccination.

But Moderna’s director of Scientific Leadership Chris Clarke said, “I don’t have the actual rates of adverse events,” as he shuffled through the papers on his desk.

Antic was staggered by the response, “You’re before a Senate inquiry and you cannot tell me the rates of serious adverse events? I mean, it’s quite extraordinary.”

Moderna took the question on notice and said that in the clinical trials they “observed no safety concerns.”

Indemnity agreements

Senator Malcolm Roberts asked for details of the indemnity agreement between Pfizer and the Australian government.

Specifically, Roberts asked if there was any clause in the agreement that indemnified Pfizer in the situation where an employee is mandated by their employer to undergo vaccination and then experiences harm.

“Senator, any indemnity agreements between Pfizer and the Australian Government are confidential, and we’re not able to discuss that in this forum,” responded Thiru.

Roberts fired back, “What have you got to hide?”

He also asked if there was any clause in the agreement that negates Pfizer’s indemnity in the event Pfizer is found to have committed fraud in the trial, as alleged by whistle-blower Brook Jackson in 2021.

“My question is simple. What is the answer? Yes or no?” asked Roberts. But Pfizer insisted “the contents of Pfizer’s contract with the Australian Government remains confidential.”

Senator Malcolm Roberts summed up his thoughts.

“You have repeatedly refused to provide evidence and dodged questions from Senators Rennick and Antic. You have relied instead on appeals to authority, and other logical fallacies.”

Covid vaccine in pregnancy

Senator Hansen confronted Pfizer with questions about the safety of its vaccine in pregnant and breastfeeding women.

Thiru did concede that there is limited clinical trial evidence in pregnant women, but said that peak bodies such as the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) supported use of the vaccine.

“[RANZCOG] have said pregnant women in Australia are a priority group for covid-19 vaccination and should be routinely offered the Pfizer vaccine (Comirnaty) or Moderna (Spikevax) vaccines at any stage of pregnancy. They have said there is no evidence of increased risk of miscarriage or teratogenic risk with mRNA or viral vaccines.”

Forced vaccination

One of the most egregious moments of the hearing was when Pfizer’s Head of Regulatory Affairs Brian Hewitt, piped up and said no-one in Australia was ever “forced” to be vaccinated.

Senator Hansen took exception to the comment and asked if Hewitt would retract his statement.

Hewitt held his position saying, “No. I believe firmly that nobody was forced to have a vaccine.”

“A lot of Australians will disagree with you on that one,” retorted Senator Hansen.

Senator Matt O’Sullivan was incredulous. He said that in his state of Western Australia, there were mandates across the board, with “very, very few exceptions.”

“If you wanted to go to work, and earn a living and provide for your family, you had to be vaccinated. I am staggered that that was your response to questions in relation to whether or not people were forced to have vaccines,” said O’Sullivan.

Many of O’Sullivan’s constituents had to go without income because the state government was “forcing” them to be vaccinated against their will.

Hewitt looked down to read a pre-prepared answer, much to the dismay of listeners.

“Senator, mandates, and vaccine requirements are determined by governments. As a company we were not involved in any government vaccine mandates. I don’t believe the mandates actually forced individuals to get vaccinated.”

Pfizer did confirm that it enforced a vaccine mandate within its own company and that it had imported a special batch of covid-19 vaccines for its employees. Why the special batch? “So that no vaccine would be taken from government stocks,” said Hewitt.

Thiru also said there were some exemptions for medical or religious reasons and that “a small number of colleagues departed the company,” presumably because they did not comply with the mandate.

Moderna, on the other hand, distanced itself from commenting on vaccine mandates.

Clarke, Director, Scientific Leadership, Moderna.

Moderna’s Vice President of Medical Affairs Jane Leong said, “We do not have a view on decisions taken by public health agencies or governments in relation to vaccine mandates. This is purely a matter for policymakers.”

At the finish line, Pfizer and Moderna executives managed to expertly dodge questions, they couldn’t recall their own rate of SAEs, they wouldn’t admit that covid vaccines cannot stop transmission, and they refused to divulge details of their indemnity agreements with the government.

Responses to questions on notice are due Aug 17, 2023.

Categories
Biden Cartel Biden Pandemic Child Abuse Corruption COVID Crime Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science

FDA Head Robert Califf Battles Misinformation — Sometimes.

 

This is a clown who served during the Obama administration. Thought the job was all fun and games. Much of this article is Government misinformation. But there are parts that they get right. Come 2024 all these clowns that took part in the attacks on our young and elderly will be gone or in jail.

FDA Head Robert Califf Battles Misinformation — Sometimes.

Robert Califf, MD, the head of the FDA, doesn’t seem to be having fun on the job.

“I would describe this year as hand-to-hand combat. Really, every day,” he said at an academic conference at Stanford in April. It’s a sentiment the FDA commissioner has expressed often.

What’s been getting Califf’s goat? Misinformation, which gets part of the blame for Americans’ stagnating life expectancy. To Califf, the country that invents many of the most advanced drugs and devices is terrible at using those technologies well. And one reason for that is Americans’ misinformed choices, he has suggested. Many don’t use statins, vaccines, or COVID-19 therapies. Many choose to smoke cigarettes and eat the wrong food.

Califf and the FDA are fighting misinformation head-on. “The misinformation machine is really causing a lot of death,” he said, in an apparent ad-lib, this spring in a speech at Tufts University. The pandemic, he told KFF Health News, helped “crystallize” his need to tackle misinformation. It was a “blatant case,” in which multiple studies gave evidence about very effective therapeutics against COVID. “And a lot of people chose not to do it.” There were “large-scale purveyors of misinformation,” he said, poisoning the well.

Occasionally, though, Califf and the FDA have added to the cacophony of misinformation. And sometimes their misinformation is about misinformation.

Califf hasn’t been able to consistently estimate misinformation’s public health toll. Last June, he said it was the “leading cause of meaningful life-years lost.” In the fall, he told a conferenceopens in a new tab or window: “I’ve been going around saying that misinformation is the most common cause of death in the United States.” He continued, “There is no way to prove that, but I do believe that it is.”

 

At other times, as in April, he has called the problem the nation’s “leading cause” of premature death. “I’ll keep working on this to try and get it right,” he said. Later, in May, he said, “Many Americans die or experience serious illness every year due to bad choices driven by false or misleading information.”

Americans’ health is indeed in dire straits. The CDC noted the country’s life expectancy has dropped 2 years in a rowopens in a new tab or window — it’s at 76.1 years as of 2021 — a dismal capper to 4 decadesopens in a new tab or window of lagging gains. Countries such as Slovenia, Greece, and Costa Rica outrank the U.S. Their newborn citizens are expected to live more than 80 yearsopens in a new tab or window, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Several factors are at the root of those differences. But Americans’ choices, often informed by bad or misleading data, political jeremiads, or profit-seeking advertising, are among the causes. For instance, one 2023 paper estimated that undervaccination against COVID — caused in part by misinformation — costs as much as $300 million per dayopens in a new tab or window, accounting for both the costs of healthcare and economic costs, like missed work.

Outside experts are sympathetic. Misinformation is a “huge problem for public health,” said Joshua Sharfstein, MD, a Johns Hopkins University public health professor and former FDA principal deputy commissioner. Having a strategy to combat it is crucial. But, he cautioned, “that’s the easiest part of this.”

The agency, which regulates products that consumers spend 20 cents of each dollar on per year, is putting more muscle behind the effort. It’s begun mentioning the subject of misinformation in its procurement requests, like one discussing the needopens in a new tab or window to monitor social media for misinformation related to cannabis.

The agency launched a “Rumor Control” pageopens in a new tab or window seeking to debunk persistent confusion. It also expects to get a report from the Reagan-Udall Foundationopens in a new tab or window, a not-for-profit organization created by Congress to advise the FDA. Califf has said he thinks better regulation — and more authorityopens in a new tab or window for the agency — would help.

Califf has noted small victories. Ivermectin, once touted as a COVID wonder drug, “eventually” became one such win. But, then again, its use is “not completely gone,” he said. And, despite winning individual battles, his optimism is muted: “I’d say right now the trend in the war is in a negative direction.”

Some of those battles have been quite small, even marginal.

And it’s difficult to know what to take on or respond to, Califf said. “I think we’re just in the early days of being able to do that,” he told KFF Health News. “It’s very hard to be scientific,” he said.

Take the agency’s experience last fall with “NyQuil chicken” — a purportedly viral cooking trend in which users roasted their birds in the over-the-counter cold medicine on social media platforms like TikTok.

Califf said his agency’s “skeleton crew” — at least relative to Big Tech giants — had picked up on increasing chatter about the meme.

But independent analyses don’t corroborate the claim. It seems much of the interest in it came only after the FDA called attention to it. The day before the agency’s pronouncement, the TikTok app recorded only five searches on the topic, BuzzFeed News found in an analysis of TikTok dataopens in a new tab or window. That tally surged to 7,000 the week after the agency’s declaration. Google Trends, which measures changes in the number of searches, shows a similar pattern: Interest peaked on the search engine in the week after the agency announcement.

Califf also claimed “injuries” occurred to participants “directly” due to the social media trend. Now, he said, “the number of injuries is down,” though he couldn’t say whether the agency’s intervention was the cause.

Again, his assertions have fuzzy underpinnings. It’s not clear what, if any, actual damage the NyQuil chicken fad caused. Poison control centers don’t keep that data, said Maggie Maloney, a spokesperson for America’s Poison Centers. And, after multiple requests, agency spokespeople declined to provide the FDA’s data reflecting increased social media traffic or injuries stemming from the meme.

In countering misinformation, FDA also risks coming off as high-handed. In September 2021, the agency tweeted about purported mythsopens in a new tab or window and misinformation on mammograms. Among the myths? That they’re painfulopens in a new tab or window. Instead, the agency explained that “everyone’s pain threshold is different” and the breast cancer-screening procedure is more often described as “temporary discomfort.”

Statements like these “erode trust,” said Lisa Fitzpatrick, MD, MPH, MPA, an infectious diseases physician and currently the CEO of Grapevine Health, a startup trying to improve health literacy in underserved communities. Fitzpatrick has previously served as an official with the District of Columbia’s Medicaid program and with the CDC.

“Who are you to judge what’s painful?” she asked, rhetorically. It’s hard to brand subjective impressions as misinformation.

Califf acknowledged the point. Speaking to 340 million Americans is difficult. With mammograms, the average patient might not have a painful experience — but many might. “Getting across that kind of nuance and public communication, I think, is in its early phases.”

Scrutiny over the agency’s role regarding food and nutrition is also mounting. After independent journalist Helena Bottemiller Evich wrote an article criticizing the agency for relying on voluntary reporting standards for baby formula, Califf tweeted to correctopens in a new tab or window a “bit of misinformation,” saying the agency did not have such authority.

An agency communications specialist made a similar intervention with New York University professor Marion Nestle, PhD, MPH, referring to a “troubling pattern of articles with erroneous information that then get amplified.” The agency was again seeking to rebut arguments that the agency had erred in not seeking mandatory reporting.

“As I see it, the ‘troubling pattern’ here is FDA’s responses to advocates like me who want to support this agency’s role in making sure food companies in general — and infant formula companies in particular — do not produce unsafe food,” Nestle retortedopens in a new tab or window. Notwithstanding the agency’s protests to Evich and Nestle, the agency had only recently asked for such authority.

Efforts to respond to or regulate misinformation are becoming a political problem.

In July, a federal judge issued a sweeping, yet temporary, injunctionopens in a new tab or window — at the instigation of Republican attorneys general, multiple right-wing political groups, and prominent anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense — barring federal health officials from contacting social media groups to correct information. A large section of the ruling detailed efforts by a CDC official to push back on suspected misinformation on social media networks.

An appeals court later issuedopens in a new tab or window its own temporary ruling — this time countering the original, sweeping order — nevertheless underscoring the extent of pushback on government pushback against misinformation. Califf has consistently played down the government’s ability to solve the problem. “One hundred percent of experts agree, government cannot solve this. We have too much distrust in fundamental institutions,” he said last June.

 A photo of Robert Califf, MD

Categories
Biden Cartel Biden Pandemic COVID Crime Facebook Links from other news sources. Politics Reprints from others.

The Facebook Files: The Effort To Censor Vaccine Information.

The Facebook Files: The Effort To Censor Vaccine Information.

OAN’s Roy Francis
2:00 PM – Friday, July 28, 2023

Republican Representative Jim Jordan released what he called “smoking-gun documents” on social media proving that Facebook had been censoring Americans on behalf of the Biden Administration.

 

Posting to Twitter, Jordan (R-Ohio) said that he has internal documents that were obtained only after Mark Zuckerberg was threatened to be held in contempt, which “PROVE” the censoring across the social media platforms due to “unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House.”

“Never-before-released internal documents subpoenaed by the Judiciary Committee PROVE that Facebook and Instagram censored posts and changed their content moderation policies because of unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House,” Jordan wrote.

He went on to explain that during the first half of 2021, Facebook executives were “facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the [Biden] White House” according to an email from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg.

Jordan went on to say that the White House had wanted a meme removed from the platform.

Facebook employees had informed the White House that removing content like the meme would be an incursion in “traditional boundaries of free expression in the U.S.” However, Andy Slavitt, a Senior Advisor to President Joe Biden ignored the warning and the First Amendment altogether.

The Biden White House also demanded to know why a video from Tucker Carlson had not been removed from the platform. Even though Facebook had replied and gave them the reasons why they could not remove the video, Biden eventually went on to publicly denounce the social media platform claiming that they were “killing people.”

In August of 2021, Facebook started working on changing its policies in order to “be more aggressive against misinformation.” The Facebook leadership said that the change in policy stemmed from the increasing pressure by the Biden administration.

In the second batch of files released by Jordan on Friday, he showed that in the summer of 2021 Facebook was working with the White House in order to “push for Americans to get vaccinated” and to “get Facebook to more aggressively police vaccine-related content, including TRUE content.”

In July 2021, Facebook’s head of Global Affairs was asked why they had been censoring the COVID lab leak theory. The answer was because of pressure from the Biden administration.

After President Biden claimed that Facebook was “killing people” because Americans were hesitant to get vaccinated after seeing vaccine related content online, Facebook employees were upset.

However, the comment by the president had caused Facebook to “re-evaluate its policies about COVID-19 content.”

Jordan goes on to explain that the administration wanted almost all information about the vaccine removed from the platform unless it agreed with their stance. This included jokes and true information alike.

In August 2021, Facebook’s leadership once again agreed to further change their content moderation policy because of mounting pressure from the administration.

Jordan ended his thread saying that the documents show how the Biden administration is working to “censor speech” and that he will be releasing even more documents in the future.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Lying to Congress about COVID origins and funding.

This long article from the Intercept documents how Kristian Andersen of Scripts Institute (La Jolla, California) lied to Congress last week by implying that he did not have any grant funding pending when he initially wrote about the lab origins. The logic is quite compelling that Andersen lied to Congress.

But what I found most disturbing was the image of the slack chat messaging that these so-called scientists had when discussing how they would skew the lab origins story to make it appear that the virus was of natural origins.

In the above message, Dr. Andersen writes in the first message that the furin cleavage site has convinced that most likely the virus is man-made. But by the end of the discussion, he writes that he will create a parallel document about the scenarios for natural origins and write that section all differently.

Andersen, returning to the question of Covid’s origin, repeated that “Natural selection and accidental release are both plausible scenarios explaining the data – and a priori should be equally weighed as possible explanations. The presence of a furin [cleavage site] a posteriori” — the furin cleavage site was the characteristic of the virus that the scientists thought was indicative of engineering or other lab origin — “moves me slightly more towards accidental release, but it’s well above my paygrade to call the shots on a final conclusion.”

In fact, Andersen would be listed as the lead author on the conclusive paper (determining that the virus was of natural origins). Rambaut responded by warning of the geopolitical fallout of such a claim. “Given the shit show that would happen if anyone serious accused the Chinese of even accidental release, my feeling is we should say that given there is no evidence of a specifically engineered virus, we cannot possible distinguish between natural evolution and escape so we are content to with ascribing it to natural processes.”

Dr. Christian Andersen also writes that he is upset the the GOF work was done in a low level BSL lab and he isn’t sure that GOF research is worth the risk. None of this of course is conveyed the original peer-reviewed papers about the natural origin that he wrote and the Fauci /NIH cabal used to insist that the virus was of natural origins, deflecting the blame for the lab leak away from the US government.

This is criminal. The original paper is fraudulent and charges should be brought against Dr. Christian Andersen for lying to Congress and for impeding a federal investigation into the origins of COVID-19, going back to 2020.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science

More data from the CDC indicates that Americans are done with mRNA COVID-19 injections.

 

 


Just look at the rates of booster administered. This must be causing some heartburn among the public health administrative set.

 

Concentrating on the pediatric population (kids)…

In babies and kids up to four years old, only 0.6% are fully vaccinated. About 5% have completed the primary series and 9% to 11% have had at least one dose.

The 5-11 year olds also are no longer getting vaccinated. Less than 5% have had a booster and only 33% have completed the 2-shot series.

It is believed that not being able to do extracurricular activities without vaccination, caused the 12-17 year olds to get vaccinated. But the good news is that only 8% have been boosted.

Frankly, these numbers are extraordinary. Parents are no longer vaccinating with this experimental vaccines.

The vast majority of adults have not had a booster!

I think we all deserve a big thanks for spreading the message. This is a world-wide group effort to fight big pharma and big government(s) controlling the narrative and we are winning!

The Five Eyes Alliance must be gritting their teeth!