Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Economy Emotional abuse Links from other news sources. Medicine Science Tony the Fauch WOKE

Getting back at the junk science. In-N-Out Requiring Employees to Show Medical Note to Wear Masks.

Getting back at the junk science. In-N-Out Requiring Employees to Show Medical Note to Wear Masks. Who can forget the COVID days when the loons told you that you bascially needed an exemption from Congress to not wear a mask? Or about 50,000 medical doctors approved by Tony the Fauch to not wear a mask? OK I’m stretching it.

Well In-N-Out Burger has loon employees who still think that they’re gonna die if they don’t wear a mask at work. Crazy I know. So In-N-Out wants those workers to have a doctors excuse saying why they have to mask up.

“It stipulates that no employee may wear a mask unless they provide a medical note that exempts them from the requirement. If they provide the medical note, they must wear a company-provided N-95 mask unless they can produce another note exempting them from that requirement too,” it added

Categories
COVID Food Links from other news sources.

Leftists Furious at In-N-Out After Company Reveals New Policy, Demand Boycott.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Leftists Furious at In-N-Out After Company Reveals New Policy, Demand Boycott. Music to my ears.

Conservatives have engaged in a very successful boycott of Bud Light over the company’s blatant political agenda, but now it looks like the left has found its own boycott target after famed fast food giant In-N-Out Burger has made them mad.

The fast food giant has garnered the ire of the left by telling employees that the coronavirus crisis is over and there is no longer a reason to wear masks in the workplace.

Frankly, why shouldn’t the burger behemoth? There are no reputable studies that show masking prevents the transmission of viruses. Masks just don’t work.

Leftist Dr. Lucky Tran was incensed enough to start a massive Twitter thread in which he wailed about the burger company and urged his leftist followers to attack them with tweets and messages on the company’s websites.

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

Discovering the disinformation playbook An excerpt from ‘The War on Ivermectin: The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic’, by Dr. Pierre Kory

Discovering the disinformation playbook  An excerpt from ‘The War on Ivermectin: The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic’, by Dr. Pierre Kory

Having fought in the “War on Ivermectin” now for almost two and half years, I know most of the military plays. But when I first set foot on the bat­tlefield, I was blissfully unaware of the rules of engagement. Hell, I didn’t even know I was fighting in a war.

One thing was crystal clear to me: Something illicit was happening around ivermectin, and Big Pharma’s fingerprints were all over the crime scene. But in the beginning, I truly believed that the pandemic would be over in a matter of months—just as soon as our review paper was published. The world would know that there was an incredibly effective agent to pre­vent and treat Covid-19; deaths would stop, and life would resume.

It physically pains me to write that last sentence.

I credit my combat training to two people, both of whom appeared in my life around the same time. The first was a man who writes under the pen name Justus Hope, MD, author of Ivermectin for the World. I had come across his book as well as multiple articles published in a California newspaper called The Desert Review in my researchso I knew who he was when he reached out. We had several in-depth conversations during which he explained his long-standing interest in Big Pharma’s war on repurposed drugs. That interest was triggered by a close friend with brain cancer which led him to the discovery that there were multiple effective repurposed drugs to treat cancer that had long been suppressed by Big Pharma. Early in the pandemic, he published a book called Surviving Cancer, Covid-19, and Disease: The Repurposed Drug Revolution. I was beginning to understand that this was an old, old war.

My second mind-altering mentor during this period was a complete stranger named Bill Grant, PhD, a physicist and the founder and president of the Sunlight, Nutrition, and Health Research Center in San Francisco. Bill is also one of the world’s foremost experts on the science behind vitamin D, with more than 300 peer-reviewed papers to his name. Out of the blue, Bill reached out to me in March of 2021 with a simple, two-line email:

Dear Dr. Kory,
What they are doing to ivermectin they have been doing to Vitamin D for decades. Bill

The note was followed by a link to an article by a group of scientists detailing precisely how disinformation is used to sway public opinion. Intrigued, I clicked the link.

The article described various disinformation tactics by equating them to American football plays. By the time I got to the end of that article, a switch inside me had flipped. I instantly knew that it was the key to understanding a world that I no longer recognized.

The article went on to detail five primary disinformation “plays” or tac­tics used by companies or industries when science emerges that is inconvenient to their interests: the fake, the fix, the blitz, the diversion, and the screen. As I read, I could think of dozens of examples for every single one of those maneuvers that had occurred around ivermectin since my senate testimony had gone viral.

The mother of all Macy’s 4th of July fireworks celebrations was going off in my brain; one realization exploding after another, each one brighter and more astonishing than the last.

Holy crap. The FLCCC was in the middle of a disinformation war with the pharmaceutical industry.

From that day on, that conceptual framework was the only thing that could make sense of what had happened and what was yet to happen in my attempts to highlight one of the safest and most effective treatments in any disease in history.

Although each play was widely represented in the events surrounding the Covid response, “the fake” was by far the most prominent—and the most damaging. In regard to repurposed drugs specifically, it involves con­ducting trials “designed to fail,” selectively publishing negative results while censoring positive results, and planting negative ghost-written editorials in legitimate journals. The article emphasized that these tactics can gravely undermine public health and safety.

You don’t say.

“The fake” formed the foundation of a campaign that would result in one of the most significant humanitarian catastrophes in history, causing millions of deaths around the world.

To be clear, ivermectin wasn’t the first casualty of World War Covid. The same tactics had been used against hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in 2020 and had they not, HCQ would have been deployed at the onset of the pandemic and saved even more lives. The closest and best description of that war I’ve discovered was featured in Robert F. Kennedy’s The Real Anthony Fauci (Skyhorse Publishing, 2021)a brilliant, expertly researched, and undeniably incriminating takedown of “America’s Doctor.”

“HHS’s early studies supported hydroxychloroquine’s efficacy against coronavirus since 2005, and by March 2020, doctors from New York to Asia were using it against Covid with extraordinary effect,” Kennedy wrote. By autumn, more than 200 studies supported treatment with hydroxychloro­quine. “From the outset, hydroxychloroquine and other therapeutics posed an existential threat to Dr. Fauci and Bill Gates’ $48 billion Covid vaccine project, and particularly to their vanity drug remdesivir, in which Gates has a large stake. Under federal law, new vaccines and medicines cannot qual­ify for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) if any existing FDA-approved drug proves effective against the same malady.”

In other words, if HCQ or ivermectin had been recognized as a viable treatment, the massive cash cow that was the global Covid-19 vaccine cam­paign would have been slaughtered on the spot.

Keep in mind that HCQ and ivermectin not only threatened the vac­cine campaign, but also the massive and exploding competitive market for other pricey Big Pharma products like Veklury (commonly known by its generic name, remdesivir), Paxlovid, molnupiravir, and monoclonal anti­bodies. Never in history had two generic, repurposed medicines threatened a marketplace of such a colossal size.

The answer to that pesky little conundrum?

Disinformation.

Over and over, each devious play has been strategically deployed to further the interests of the establishment to the unbridled disservice of mankind.


You can find ‘The War on Ivermectin: The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic’ at a bookstore near you.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Crime Links from other news sources.

Looking back, how ridiculous was wearing masks?

Looking back, how ridiculous was wearing masks? Almost as bad as continuously getting jabbed. Based on nothing but Tony the Fauch’s word, millions of people were wearing these masks.

Sure I wore a mask where it was required, but knowing I didn’t have COVID and if I did, I knew the odds were slim to none that I would spread it.

My fear was folks who had COVID were spreading it because there were only two types of masks that kept most of the germs inside the mask.

Now the loons who wore the masks thinking that they couldn’t get COVID were the ones dying. But that was for so long kept a secret.

Even if you did have the N95 or KN95 AND HAD THE VACCINE, odds were that you were just as protected as the person who didn’t have a mask or the vaccine. In plane English the mask did not help to keep the virus out.

The Jan. 30 review found that based on existing randomized controlled trials — which tested the effectiveness of interventions encouraging people to wear masks, rather than testing the effectiveness of masks themselves — wearing masks in the community “probably makes little or no difference” to the number of people with influenza or COVID-19-like illnesses.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Tony the Fauch

Top Fauci Adviser Admits to Using Private Email to Avoid FOIA Requests.

Top Fauci Adviser Admits to Using Private Email to Avoid FOIA Requests. “I Will Delete Anything I Don’t Want to See in the New York Times” So how does he get away with this?

Federal records obtained by the House Oversight Committee reveal one of Dr. Fauci’s top advisers said he used his personal email account in order to avoid any Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and even went as far to imply he has deleted emails during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The House Oversight Committee released possibly incriminating emails from Dr. David Morens who has served as an adviser at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for the last 25 years.

In one of his emails that was uncovered by Republican Rep. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio, Dr. Morens wrote to his colleagues, “As you know, I try to always communicate on Gmail because my NIH email is FOIA’d constantly.” In the conclusion of his email, Morens wrote, “I will delete anything I don’t want to see in the New York Times.”

The whole article is here.

 

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

Serious adverse events from Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine are not “rare”

Serious adverse events from Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine are not “rare”

Despite repeatedly claiming that serious harms of Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine are RARE, an investigation found no drug regulator could quantify the rate. Experts say it’s “hypocritical.”

Share

Drug regulators and public health agencies have saturated the airways with claims that serious harms following covid vaccination are “rare.”

But there has been very little scrutiny of that claim by the media, and I could not find an instance where international agencies actually quantified what they meant by the term “rare” or provided a scientific source.

The best evidence so far, has been a study published in one of vaccinology’s most prestigious journals, where independent researchers reanalysed the original trial data for the mRNA vaccines.

The authors, Fraiman et al, found that serious adverse events (SAEs) – i.e. adverse events that require hospitalisation – were elevated in the vaccine arm by an alarming rate – 1 additional SAE for every 556 people vaccinated with Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine.

According to a scale used by drug regulators, SAEs occurring at a rate of 1 in 556 is categorised as “uncommon,” but far more common than what the public has been told.

Therefore, I asked eight drug regulators and public health agencies to answer a simple question: what is the official calculated rate of SAEs believed to be caused by Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine, and what is the evidence?

The agencies were FDATGAMHRAHCPEICDCECDC and EMA.

The outcome was startling.

What is the official SAE rate?

Not a single agency could cite the SAE rate of Pfizer’s vaccine. Most directed me to pharmacovigilance data, which they all emphasised does not establish causation.

The Australian TGA, for example, referred me to the spontaneous reporting system but warned, “it is not possible to meaningfully use these data to calculate the true incidence of adverse events due to the limitations of spontaneous reporting systems.”

Both the German regulator (PEI) and European CDC referred me to the European Medicines Agency which, according to its own report, saw no increase at all in SAEs. “SAEs occurred at a low frequency in both vaccinated and the placebo group at 0.6%.”

The UK regulator MHRA went so far as to state it “does not make estimations of a serious adverse event (SAE) rate, or a rate for adverse reactions considered to be causally related for any medicinal product.”

The US FDA, on the other hand, did conceded that SAEs after mRNA vaccination have “indeed been higher than that of influenza vaccines,” but suggested it was justified because “the severity and impact of covid-19 on public health have been significantly higher than those of seasonal influenza.

Despite analysing at the same dataset as Fraiman, the FDA said it “disagrees with the conclusions” of the Fraiman analysis. The agency did not give specifics on the areas of disagreement, nor did it provide its own rate of SAEs.

Expert response

In response to the criticism, Joe Fraiman, emergency doctor and lead author on the reanalysis said, “To be honest, I’m not that surprised that agencies have not determined the rate of SAEs. Once these agencies approve a drug there’s no incentive for them to monitor harms.”

Joe Fraiman, emergency doctor, New Orleans, Louisiana

Fraiman said it’s hypocritical for health agencies to tell people that serious harms of the covid vaccines are rare, when they have not even determined the SAE rate themselves.

“It’s very dangerous not to be honest with the public,” said Fraiman, who recently called for the mRNA vaccines to be suspended.

“These noble lies may get people vaccinated in the short term but you’re creating decades or generations of distrust when it’s revealed that they have been misleading the public,” added Fraiman.

Dick Bijl, a physician and epidemiologist based in the Netherlands, agreed.  “It goes to show how corrupted these agencies are. There is no transparency, especially since regulators are largely funded by the drug industry.”

Dick Bijl, physician and past President of the International Society of Drug Bulletins

Bijl said it’s vital to know the rate of SAEs for the vaccines. “You must be able to do a harm:benefit analysis, to allow people to give fully informed consent, especially in young people at low risk of serious covid or those who have natural immunity.”

Bijl said the mainstream media has allowed these agencies to make false claims about the safety of vaccines without interrogating the facts.

“The rise of alternative media is strongly related to the lies being told by the legacy media, which just repeats government narratives and industry marketing. In the Netherlands, there is a lot of discussion about the distrust in public messaging,” said Bijl.

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

Bill Ackman explains why he embraced RFK Jr.’s skepticism on COVID vaccines.

Bill Ackman explains why he embraced RFK Jr.’s skepticism on COVID vaccines. This article from CNBC is mostly anti RFK JR., but they do allow Ackman to get his point across about why he changed his views on the COVID vaccines.

  • Bill Ackman, one of the most influential investors on Wall Street, has stunned his Wall Street peers by amplifying Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s vaccine skepticism.
  • “I listened to RFK on several podcasts and a town hall and thought he raised important issues about vaccines and other issues that were worth learning more about,” the Pershing Square CEO told CNBC.Bill Ackman said in 2021 that delaying Covid vaccinations for older Americans “seems like genocide.”Today, the influential hedge fund chief and investor is amplifying the anti-vaccine views of Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

    Ackman is not denying his change. In fact, he said Kennedy is asking “important questions” about vaccines, raising issues he is interested in learning more about.

    Several of Ackman’s recent tweets about Covid vaccines have stunned and confounded many of his colleagues on Wall Street, according to several people who have known and been allied with him for years. And it’s led both his allies and foes to ask the same question: Why is he doing this?

    Ackman answered that question in an interview with CNBC on Wednesday.

    “I listened to RFK on several podcasts and a town hall and thought he raised important issues about vaccines and other issues that were worth learning more about,” said Ackman, the CEO of Pershing Square Capital. “I don’t feel like we’ve fully answered questions about the safety of all vaccines, particularly more recently approved vaccines, and our approach to determining their safety and efficacy.”

    Ackman, a billionaire whose commentary can move markets, is the latest high profile executive to show support for Kennedy and his opinions.

    Wall Street veteran Omeed Malik is hosting a campaign fundraiser for Kennedy later this month in the Hamptons. Venture capitalist David Sacks and fellow tech leader Chamath Palihapitiya hosted a fundraiser for Kennedy in June, which raised approximately $500,000 for Kennedy’s campaign. Ackman would not say whether he planned to donate to Kennedy’s campaign for president.

    Ackman told CNBC his newfound worries about vaccines come from being a parent and a concerned citizen. He said Kennedy, in his view, is asking “important questions” about them. “Unfortunately, vaccines are not safety tested,” Kennedy said at a town hall late last month.

″@RobertKennedyJr and others have raised important questions about the safety of some vaccines and have sought explanations for the dramatic increases in the incidence of childhood allergies, autism, and other health issues. These are good questions that have not been adequately answered,” Ackman said in a tweet last month that quoted a video of former Fox News host Tucker Carlson arguing that Kennedy is getting the better of President Joe Biden in the early days of the Democratic primary campaign.

When asked if he believes whether Kennedy should be president, Ackman said: “I don’t yet know, but I think he is asking important questions and raising interesting issues that are worthy of discussion and debate.”

Ackman, who has backed Democrats in the past, also wouldn’t say whether he will back Biden.

“It depends on the alternatives at the time of the general election,” Ackman said. “My strong preference is that he announces now that he won’t run to create a more open field for other candidates.”

The man is a far left wing Progressive, but he’s having second thoughts on COVID and there’s nothing wrong with that. So let’s see if more Progressives come out of the closet and take a second look at the COVID misinformation.

 

Categories
Corruption COVID Crime Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Walensky’s hypocritical exit from the CDC.

 

Walensky’s hypocritical exit from the CDC.

This week, The Wall Street Journal reports that Rochelle Walensky steps down as CDC director and warns the public to be on guard against misinformation and the politicisation of science.

Ironically, this comes after two and a half years of Walensky misinforming the public and politicising the science.

I have documented how Walensky misled Congress on various issues, including covid vaccine effectiveness against viral transmission and on Cochrane’s review of face masks.

Walensky testified that her public statement on MSNBC in March 2021 about how “vaccinated people do not carry the virus, they do not get sick” was accurate. But even today, the FDA states that efficacy against transmission is unproven.

Walensky also said that the summary of Cochrane’s review of face masks had been “retracted.” But it was neither retracted, nor had the authors of the review changed the language in the summary.

A recent, damning study by Krohnert et al, solidifies criticism of the agency.  The researchers compiled instances of numerical and statistical errors made by the CDC during the COVID-19 pandemic.

After reviewing CDC publications, press releases, interviews, meetings, and Twitter accounts, they found a total of 25 instances where Walensky’s agency promoted demonstrably false numbers and statistical errors.

The majority (80%) of these instances exaggerated the severity of the COVID-19 situation. For example, on Oct 27, 2021, Walensky said “there have been 745 deaths in children less than 18,” but the National Center for Health Statistics showed it was 558 deaths.

At a White House COVID-19 briefing on Jun 23, 2022, Walensky claimed that COVID-19 was a “top 5 cause of death” in children, which was also untrue.

And in Feb this year, Walensky testified before Congress that there had been “2000 paediatric deaths from COVID-19”, when in fact, it was 1400-1500.

In some cases, the errors were not corrected, or the errors were repeated. Notably, the vast majority of errors (94%) made by the CDC pertained to exaggerated COVID-19 risks to children, which the authors say would have influenced the discussion of pandemic policies.

“The CDC’s errors have likely led the public to believe children’s risks are higher than they truly are,” wrote the authors.

“CDC’s guidance repeatedly called for restrictions being placed on children, including school closures, mask mandates, and strong recommendations for vaccinations and multiple boosters even among children who have recovered from the virus,” they added.

Consequently, the authors suggested that the agency responsible for reporting health statistics should be firewalled from the agency setting health policy – something that would avoid biased statistics or the politicisation of the science.

CDC delusion

 

At the commencement of her tenure at the CDC, Walensky wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times saying she found it “extremely disturbing” hearing reports that White House officials in the Trump administration interfered with official guidance of the CDC.

“I believe in the agency’s mission and commitment to knowledge, statistics and guidance. I will do so by leading with facts, science and integrity and being accountable for them,” wrote Walensky.

But the public has not witnessed any accountability – the opposite in fact. Now that her tenure is over, Walensky remains defiant as she reflects on her time as director.

“We made this world a safer place. I have never been prouder of anything I have done in my professional career,” said Walensky after announcing her resignation.

The Biden administration has since nominated Dr Mandy Cohen, an internal medicine physician and former state health secretary in North Carolina, as the new CDC director to replace Walensky.

But many fear that Cohen will implement more of the same unevidenced, misguided health policies as her predecessor.

Mandy Cohen, CDC director seen wearing a “Dr Fauci” face mask.

Cohen supported forcibly masking children in schools, and promoted cloth masks despite no evidence for their effectiveness at stopping viral spread, which many say, should have been immediately disqualifying for the position.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Links from other news sources.

Why? Stanford Study of Paxlovid for Long COVID Stopped Early.

Why? Stanford Study of Paxlovid for Long COVID Stopped Early. Enrollment was halted earlier than planned after intern analysis. We have this from MedPage Today. No reasons were given.

Enrollment into a small trial of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) for long COVID — one that previously garnered attention for investigators not wearing masksopens in a new tab or window — has been stopped early after an interim analysis, Stanford University confirmed to MedPage Today.

Two sources familiar with the STOP-PASC studyopens in a new tab or window told MedPage Today that trial enrollment had been halted. One was told by a study coordinator that a preliminary review found “inconclusive evidence” for the primary outcome of the study. Another said their first appointment was canceled just a few days before it was supposed to take place, and they were later told that all future enrollment had been halted.

Why was the study stopped? Or was it?

Complete article is here.

Categories
America's Heartland Biden Pandemic Corruption COVID Faked news

The Amish Died of COVID at a Rate 90 Times LOWER Than the Rest of America

 

FROM THE VIGILANT FOX

“I did the calculation,” testified Steve Kirsch in front of the Pennsylvania State Senate.

Given that five Amish people died in Lancaster County, PA, “the Amish died at a rate 90 times lower than the infection fatality rate of the United States of America.”

“Now, how is that possible?” Steve Kirsch asked. “It’s possible because the Amish aren’t vaccinated. And because the Amish didn’t follow a single guideline of the CDC,” he answered.

“They did not lock down. They did not mask. They did not social distance. They did not vaccinate, and there were no mandates in the Amish community to get vaccinated. They basically ignored every single guideline that the CDC gave us. Ignoring those guidelines meant a death rate 90 times lower than the rest of America.”

 

Here’s the video transcript for those who want to read more:

Let’s talk about the Amish. Yesterday, I drove to Lancaster County (Pennsylvania). I drove to Amish country. I drove from house to house to house. I actually went to the house of a relative of Gideon King. He’s the one person, the only known person in the Amish community who supposedly died from COVID — that I’m aware of.

Now, they say there may be up to five people in Lancaster County who died from COVID, but I was unable to get the names of five people. I offered a $2,500 reward on Twitter. Hey, give me the names of more than five people in Lancaster County who died from COVID. Not a single person was able to name more than one person. They all named Gideon King. One guy.

So, I actually went to the house of Sam King, who’s a relative of Gideon King. And I talked to Sam. He doesn’t know if Gideon actually died from COVID or not. He died in the hospital. They think it was COVID, but maybe he died from the COVID hospital protocols. Okay.

So, you look at the Amish. I did the calculation. Let’s say there were five Amish people — because people say, I think there were maybe a few, or maybe there were five Amish people. And then I asked them, okay, can you name them? And nobody can name them.

But let’s say that we could name them — and there were five Amish people who died. That means the Amish died at a rate 90 times lower than the infection fatality rate of the United States of America. The Amish died at 90 times lower rate from COVID than America — than the rest of America.

Now, how is that possible? It’s possible because the Amish aren’t vaccinated. And because the Amish didn’t follow a single guideline of the CDC. They did not lock down. They did not mask. They did not social distance, They did not vaccinate, and there were no mandates in the Amish community to get vaccinated. They basically ignored every single guideline that the CDC gave us. Ignoring those guidelines meant a death rate 90 times lower than the rest of America.

So you talk about taking guidance from the WHO? Why don’t we copy what works? In fact, wouldn’t it be great to say in the next pandemic that Pennsylvania will take guidance from the Amish instead of the WHO? And you will be much, much better off.

Steve Kirsch breaks down the numbers in more detail on his Substack page:
Steve Kirsch’s newsletter
BREAKING: The US COVID mitigation measures resulted in 90X higher COVID deaths
Executive summary On May 22, 2023, I offered a $2,500 reward for anyone to give me the names of more than 5 Amish people in Lancaster, PA (which is the world’s largest single community of Amish people with over 45,000 people) who died from COVID. Nobody could do that. I got a few names. And nobody could name anyone under 50 years old who was suspected of…
Read more