Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Drugs Science

Fauci Confirms Fake COVID Treatment Made Him More Sick, Another Fail By Biden’s Administration!

By Michael Robison  for TGP Published June 29, 2022

On Tuesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci confirmed that he is experiencing “COVID rebound” after taking Pfizer’s Paxlovid, the so-called silver bullet that Biden wasted billions in taxpayer dollars to support. 

Paxlovid appears to have almost zero effectiveness for people that are already vaccinated, according to the manufacturer Pfizer’s data.

Fauci, shared his health update while speaking remotely at the Foreign Policy Global Health Forum.

Earlier in June, Fauci tested positive for the virus with mild symptoms, including fatigue. According to Fauci, as his symptoms worsened, he began a five-day course of the supposed wonder drug. 

When talking about his experience with the medication, Fauci said that he tested negative for the virus three days in a row. However, when he tested again on the fourth day, the test was positive again.  

Fauci said that his symptoms were “much worse” after he tested positive for the second time following the treatment with Paxlovid.

Watch below:

 

In May, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued a formal warning of a COVID rebound due to a course of Paxlovid. 

The CDC said that some patients prescribed Paxlovid suffered a recurrence of symptoms or tested positive for Covid between two and eight days after beginning treatment. 

According to a June 22 University of California San Diego School of Medicine study, Covid-19 rebound symptoms after a course of Paxlovid are due to the failure of Pfizer’s wonder drug to impact infected cells and stop viral replication. The study notes that the medication may be rendered useless in vaccinated individuals. 

The day after that study was published, Pfizer published its own data from stage 2 drug trials confirming the exact details. The study noted that a fully vaccinated person with a low risk of COVID complications had little to gain from using the drug.

A COVID-positive person allegedly should use Paxlovid to limit symptoms and prevent them from becoming severe enough to require hospitalization. The drug received emergency use authorization in late 2021.  

Biden has touted the drug during his 2022 State of the Union address as one of the triumphs of America’s COVID response.

At the 2022 State of the Union, Biden said: “If you get COVID-19, the Pfizer pill reduces your chances of ending up in the hospital by 90 percent.”

“I’ve ordered more pills than anyone in the world has. Pfizer is working overtime to get us a million pills this month and more than double that next month,” he said. 

 

Fauci’s experience seems to verify that of the drug trials, Paxlovid offers little to no benefit for treating the China virus. It is simply another tool used by the big pharmaceutical companies to milk the U.S. government for billions of dollars. 

 

Categories
Elections Reprints from others. Science

Uh Oh — U.S. Officials Announce More Steps Against Monkeypox Outbreak

From CBS and elsewhere:
WHO Monkeypox
This 2003 electron microscope image made available by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows mature, oval-shaped monkeypox virions, left, and spherical immature virions, right, obtained from a sample of human skin associated with the 2003 prairie dog outbreak.  Cynthia S. Goldsmith, Russell Regner/CDC via AP, file
Reacting to a surprising and growing monkeypox outbreak, U.S. health officials on Tuesday expanded the group of people recommended to get vaccinated against the monkeypox virus.
They also said they are providing more monkeypox vaccine, working to expand testing, and taking other steps to try to get ahead of the outbreak.
“We will continue to take aggressive action against this virus,” said Dr. Ashish Jha, White House COVID-19 response coordinator, who has also been playing a role in how the government deals with monkeypox.
The administration said it was expanding the pool of people who are advised to get vaccinated to include those who may realize on their own that they could have been infected. That includes men who who have recently had sex with men at parties or in other gatherings in cities where monkeypox cases have been identified.
Most monkeypox patients experience only fever, body aches, chills and fatigue. People with more serious illness may develop a rash and lesions on the face and hands that can spread to other parts of the body. The disease is endemic in parts of Africa, where people have been infected through bites from rodents or small animals. It does not usually spread easily among people.
Last month, cases began emerging in Europe and the United States. Many but not all of those who contracted the virus had traveled internationally. Most were men who have sex with men, but health officials stress that anyone can get monkeypox.
Case counts have continued to grow. As of Tuesday, the U.S. had identified 306 cases in 27 states and the District of Columbia. More than 4,700 cases have been found in more than 40 other countries outside the areas of Africa where the virus is endemic.
There have been no U.S. deaths and officials say the risk to the American public is low. But they are taking steps to assure people that medical measures are in place to deal with the growing problem.One of the steps was to expand who is recommended to get vaccinated. Vaccines customarily are given to build immunity in people before they are ever infected. But if given within days or even a few weeks of first becoming infected, some vaccines can reduce severity of symptoms. A two-dose vaccine, Jynneos, is approved for monkeypox in the U.S. The government has many more doses of an older smallpox vaccine ACAM2000 that they say could also be used, but that vaccine is considered to have a greater risk of side effects and is not recommended for people who have HIV.
So it’s the Jynneos vaccine that officials have been trying to use as a primary weapon against the monkeypox outbreak. So far, the government has deployed over 9,000 doses of vaccine. U.S. officials on Tuesday said they are increasing the amount of Jynneos vaccine they are making available, allocating 56,000 doses immediately and about 240,000 more over the coming weeks. They promised more than 1 million more over the coming months. Officials said limited Jynneos doses will be allocated “using a four-tier distribution strategy that prioritizes jurisdictions with the highest case rates of monkeypox,” and that the number of doses distributed would be based on the number of people at risk for monkeypox and on how many of them can’t get ACAM2000 because of HIV.
That suggests the largest number of doses might go to states like New York, California and Illinois, each of which has reported more than 40 cases. However, officials on Tuesday did not say exactly which jurisdictions would be at the top of the list.
David Harvey, executive director of the National Coalition of STD Directors, was critical of the government’s announcement. “We have more questions than ever about how this vaccine will make it to those most at-risk in an equitable way and how the U.S. will ramp up testing and provide access to the best therapeutics,” Harvey said in a statement.
Another change announced Tuesday: Until now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has advised that vaccines be given after exposure to people whom health officials identify as close personal contacts of cases. But on Tuesday, CDC officials say they are expanding the recommendation to people who were never identified but may realize on their own that they may have been infected.
That can include men who have sex with men who have recently had multiple sex partners in a venue where there was known to be monkeypox or in an area where monkeypox is spreading.
“It’s almost like we’re expanding the definition of who a contact might be,” said the CDC’s Jennifer McQuiston. If people have been to a party or other place where monkeypox has been known to spread “we recommend they come in for a vaccine,” she said.The CDC’s expansion follows similar steps taken in New York City and the District of Columbia.The District of Columbia has identified 19 cases, but case-tracking investigations revealed that some of the infected men had been in gatherings where they were hugging, kissing or in other forms of close intimate contact with people they didn’t know, said Anil Mangla of the D.C. health department.
It was clear that “we were missing something here,” and needed to start offering services to others, said Mangla, an epidemiologist.
Last Thursday, New York City’s health department — armed with 1,000 of doses of Jynneos from the federal government — announced it was opening a temporary clinic to offer the vaccine to all gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men who have had multiple or anonymous sex partners in the previous two weeks.
But all the appointments quickly filled up that day, and the last round of appointments was Monday. “Until we receive more supply we are unable to release additional vaccination appointments,” said Patrick Gallahue, a spokesman for the city’s health department, in an email.
On Monday, the District of Columbia’s health department took a similar step. The department started taking appointments at 1 p.m. Monday but had to stop after 20 minutes, Mangla said.
The department only had 200 doses of Jynneos, and it was clear at the point that it the department didn’t have the vaccine supply or staffing to continue to sign up new people, he said.

Hmm… wonder if we’ll get a new lockdown…just in time for the General Election, maybe?
Or maybe they want to get rid of these men, like with Aids?

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Pandemic COVID Politics Polls Progressive Racism Reprints from others. Science

Moral Blinding: How the COVID-Prevention Fetish Killed Critical Thinking

This article was written by Susan Dunham.

Feeling the fuzzies

Our first lockdown was like a great war effort. It was the closest we’ve come to the home-front experience of the World Wars, when people set aside every selfish thought in favor of the collective wellbeing. We ground our lives to a halt in a powerful rebuke against an emerging threat. Heroes emerged, along with new rituals to honor them as we banged pots for frontline workers and decorated our neighborhoods with messages of thanks. Meanwhile, the rest of us did our part: we stayed home. And it all felt good.

Months later, rising COVID cases have plunged us into another lockdown, which in short order has become a practiced routine. After a lax summer and fall season, we slip back into the usual stay-at-home restrictions. We triple our vigilance: we keep our distance, follow the masking rules, and sanitize compulsively. “Be safe,” we wish each other in lieu of the customary farewells. Even the fearless pitch in, because staying safe means preventing yourself from becoming a threat to others.

All of the prescribed safety practices have become part of a new social ritual. Participation demonstrates one’s commitment to the collective wellbeing, which the pandemic has taught us is not an individual game but a group effort. Masking, sanitizing, distancing, and isolating are not only safety measures in the traditional sense but they have also become the new signs of caring. And they are fast becoming a prerequisite for societal participation. No mask, no service says many signs in store windows, big and small.

As Canadians, long-renowned for politeness, compliance under these terms is practically built into the national DNA. Save for some pockets of protests in our larger cities, we have demonstrated a willingness to give up a little bit of our personal freedom for the greater good, and we embrace whatever is asked of us if it can save a life.

But is that really such a good thing? Could it be that our impassioned acceptance of drastic new norms makes us a little too willing to compromise on everything if we can be convinced it’s the righteous thing to do? And has our conscience been hijacked so that we consent to new norms that actually dismantle the progress we’ve made towards a free and open society?

I argue that the COVID crisis has turned a once liberal society into a cult of compliance and that we have sold off an open marketplace of ideas in a bid to secure our safety. In its place we have built a new social operating system that coerces consent and could one day render us incapable of seeing the true effects of policies that masquerade as public good..

Creating tunnel vision

While we were placing “Stay at Home” badges on top of our Instagram selfies, congratulating ourselves for staying inside, The World Food Program — an agency of the UN — was reporting that 130 million more people in developing nations would face starvation by the end of the year as a direct result of the global economy which we ground to a halt. That means tens of millions of additional deaths in developing countries because of lockdown.

At home we knew that suicide numbers must have skyrocketed and that countless unstable home lives turned dramatically worse, while food bank lines extended longer than we had ever seen them.

But rather than these realities sobering us out of our moral stupor, they instead inspired us to double-down on the categorical importance of lockdown, even as we were learning that most people are not at serious risk of severe illness. No cost was too high to prevent one more COVID case.

Months later, with better perspective on the costs of lockdown, we find ourselves in yet another one. Although we entered it with reduced appetite for the same kind of stringency we saw last spring, we have dutifully complied with everything that the case numbers have demanded. We’ve thrown out every skeptic thought, because the unquantified concerns of mental health, childhood developmental delay, economic collapse, and mass death by starvation the world over do not hold an audience more powerfully than the running tally of COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

The constant beat of daily broadcast COVID briefings and the bombardment of public health messaging play no small part in constructing our perception of the coronavirus threat. Reshaping our lives to avoid a virus seems logical and inevitable when the only metric we’re allowed to hear is the COVID numbers. How naturally all other facets of life seem to fall away when we are properly obsessed over a single problem to the exclusion of all others.

This curation of concern single-handedly drives our collective reaction to the emergent coronavirus. Our laser focus on all things COVID creates a kind of team spirit in the wellness effort, encouraging our embrace of the pain-loving self sacrifice of lockdown — and blinding us to both its costs and its alternatives.

Affirming the course

By now we should have heard from our public health policy-makers that instead of blanket lockdown, we might opt for a model that is business-as-usual with the exception of a full marshaling of resources aimed at those who self-identify as vulnerable and full support for only their isolation. We don’t question the absence of this suggestion because we have been so locked onto the altruistic idea of self-sacrifice for the greater good that any kind of debate would seem selfishly motivated.

Instead we indulge in the joy of pitching-in and doing good, while remaining guiltlessly ignorant of the fact that history might look back upon lockdown as a devastating mistake. Meanwhile, we collect our CERB cheques and boast about the moral virtues of remaining indefinitely couch-bound. Thus we are placated by a public health policy that we should be debating at the very least.

The great opiate of public health stewardship makes us feel so assured of our righteousness that questioning health regulations is morally suspect. We look unkindly at the oppositional thinker, the lockdown skeptic who threatens to upend the whole care-making experience of the COVID era. Whereas normally we would give skeptical voices vital consideration, especially before embracing the drastic new normal we’ve been handed, we instead condemn them out of hand because we are pre-conditioned to despise their very premise.

Much analysis is given to the pandemic response on the government level, but it is our pandemic response on the social level which will prove the most significant to history, because that is where the true forces of lasting change carve out their legacies.

The on-the-ground tensions between the majority of us who embrace policy and those who don’t is the effect of a social phenomenon which has demonstrated an enormous capacity to reshape our world. What we are gripped by is a peculiar kind of collective blindness disguised as goodwill and righteousness that turns us against all forms of debate on public policy so long as it is positioned correctly.

Dehumanizing the rebel

Toronto’s first lockdown protest in April drew the ire of a vocal majority who denounced participants as selfish, small-minded, ignorant, and reckless. These were anti-science bigots whose ideas literally endangered lives. They thumbed their noses at the new rituals which were meanwhile bringing the city together. The protests grew in number and in frequency into the summer months. Demonstrators were spared no ill will by the court of public opinion. Many commentators openly wished they see their comeuppance in the form of a hospital bed, and such tidings were met with all round applause.

There is no moral standing, as we see it, from which to question the edicts of the health experts. Our enthusiastic focus on the wellness effort has morphed into a complete intolerance for debate on the issue. We are so emboldened by our collective struggle that we feel morally justified in throwing all opposition into the fire.

Thus we’ve become locked into a radical, all-in moral defense of new and unprecedented rules. Such a rabid mode of categorical compliance establishes a dangerous low in our capacity for critically, rather than emotionally, perceiving the issues we face. We now despise rebellious thinking, even if those deviant ideas might be our life raft out of dangerous waters.

While the Coronavirus is often said to have brought out the best in us — with our pot-banging and our well-wishing — all of this team-building has produced, almost by necessity, a dark response to doubting voices.

Silencing doubt

SARS-COV-2 has changed our reaction to voices that oppose the crowd. Whereas in the past, outlier thinking, skepticism of mainstream messaging and policy makers, nonconformity in the face of social pressure were all tolerated if not welcomed, now we deem these things dangerous, not stimulating.

The pain of the pandemic, which has shown us what can happen when people adopt the wrong kinds of opinions, has made us hypersensitive to regressive views on other global issues like climate change, vaccination, social justice, even politics, in which the actions of the individual can affect the group. We have seen the consequence of too much freedom of thought in the form of lockdowns and packed ICUs, and we bristle to think what future crises might unfold if the wrong opinions gain traction again.

So we put extra effort into vilifying harmful views. If we have to contend with freedom of speech and freedom of thought, then we get around that obstacle by making unsafe views so socially toxic that they’re more dangerous for the speaker than they are for society. Be caught courting an unsanctioned idea and get branded an enemy of the public good. Suddenly yesterday’s eccentric thinker is today’s ignorant, selfish, uneducated bigot.

The ideological cooling effect of such a social mechanism is an effective tool for steering opinion and, as the pandemic has demonstrated, behavior too.

Saving face

Universal masking and protocol compliance has been so effectively adopted precisely because it has become socially untenable to do otherwise. To be caught without a mask, that brilliant piece of cloth that shows you care, is to forfeit your status as a well-meaning member of society.

And so we have it that much of the moral fetishization of COVID protocols — the excessive displays of complying well beyond the public guidelines — has become a way of signifying ideological affinity. So repellent is the image of the COVID skeptic that COVID compliance has become as much about self-image as it is about public safety — if not more.

We find ourselves trapped within a new social formula in which conformity is social currency. The more one over-performs the prescribed duties and rituals of the good citizen, the more approval is bestowed, and the more distance the performer creates between themselves and the looming image of the social monster.

In this paradigm, independent thinking — synthesizing available data into more nuanced or perhaps contradictory conclusions — is taboo. The social rewards of conformity far outweigh the immoral stink of rebellious thought. It simply becomes no longer worth the shame, stigma, self-doubt, and the bother of holding and sharing a competing idea.

There is no end in sight to this new model now that we have set it into motion. It has been embraced during pandemic and the gears are already turning to point this machinery towards other global efforts. It is our new social operating system — and it has already proven its capacity to reshape society without limitation. Consider how absurd the notion would have been just over a year ago that it would be reprehensible to be caught barefaced in a grocery store. What absurdities today will we reconstruct as the moral obligations of tomorrow?

We now have a framework for coercing total compliance to new and changing rules and rituals, which need no backing by logic or sense. How many truly contradictory public protocols do we now follow for the sake of optics alone? We jump into the street to give space to fellow pedestrians even though there is no realistic concern for transmission in this way. Proof and reason become redundancies — at most, formalities. If the Coronavirus ever ceases to be a concern, how many people will truly abandon masking when it has become so ingrained as a symbol of prudence and altruism? Compliance becomes its own end when its made synonymous with moral good.

And thus a moral blinding has stricken society. COVID-19 has gathered us so tightly around the bonfire of cooperation, either by conversion or coercion, that we have found no better place to be, and we have lost our tolerance for anyone refusing to join. We’ve completely annexed our capacity to judge what is being asked of us dispassionately, leaving open an unguarded pathway to our consent through both our heartstrings and our self-image.

Losing Control

The foundation is laid for future incursions into our daily normal, which have no hope of encountering resistance. The next radical social change need only be positioned as the next good thing, and even in the mind of the conflicted individual, doubt will be set aside in favor of appearance. Woe to anyone with the misfortune of disagreeing, because an intense, scapegoating hatred for those who do not comply will justify any manner of policy, punishment, and correction against them. And social spoils will await the loudest and most zealous followers and enforcers of whatever new normal the future cooks up.

We have burned our safety net against tyranny. Rather than doing the hard thing, respecting an individual’s right to self-direction even at a marginal expense of safety, we wage war on thought, between right-think and wrong-think, good action versus bad action so that we may burn every deviant in our path.

Sealing our fate

Through a system of self-adulating social rituals, single-minded public messaging, and stigmatization of the uncooperative, we have lost our capacity to see the shades of gray between extremes and to recognize the fundamental merits of debate and the freedom to dissent. We now prefer that every last skeptic be shamed into compliance, as if the benefit of that is worth the cost of forcing a free society into a hive mind.

We have so easily forgotten that it is in the dialectic of competing views — some for this side, others for that side — that we prevent any one extreme from over-dominating. And it is precisely by the moral exclusion of oppositional views that a population finds itself one day in a world it doesn’t recognize.

So while the world stampedes in lockstep towards new extremes of safety protocols, we are in danger of a well-intentioned agenda breaking away from itself and running ahead of its own mandate if there is no one left to one day challenge it.

And yet the average person shakes their head to learn of the latest citizen to defy protocol.

In just a few short months, the old liberal mindset that would have called for a balance between safety and liberty, that would have rejected the idea that science offers only one way through a crisis, that would have accepted the foundational need for some dissent, has eroded into a culture of compliance. To obey is to care. That is the equation that has reprogrammed our social order. And if it might benefit us today, it could more easily hurt us tomorrow, the next time something to which we wouldn’t normally consent finds that tested appeal to our hearts.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Drugs Science

Take THAT Karens: Latest CDC Data Shows Covid-19 Infections Higher in Boosted Americans Compared to Unboosted

By Jim Hoft  Published June 6, 2022 at 4:00pm

The latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed that breakthrough Covid-19 infections in April was worse in boosted Americans compared to the vaccinated but not boosted.

According to the data analyzed by far-left CBS, the week of April 23 showed that boosted Americans are catching COVID-19 at nearly double the rate of those who have not been boosted. But claimed the unvaccinated remain the highest group.

The unvaccinated rate is a bit misleading as CDC includes those with 1 dose and even 2 doses under 14 days. In the UK, they separate those with zero doses from those who received the vaccination. They categorized it as follows: Unvaccinated, within 21 days of first dose, 21 days or more after first dose, within 21 days of second dose, and 21 days or more after second dose.

The reality is the jabs, initial or boosters, do not prevent infection or transmission of the virus. During Omicron and Delta waves, it was the vaccinated population who were severely infected.

This April, an analysis of CDC data by The Epoch Times reveals that the most vaccinated areas of the United States are experiencing the highest numbers of covid cases – and it’s not just by a little bit. The infection rate is significantly higher than in the areas where vaccine compliance is lowest.

In other words – the data indicates that, at best, the vaccines don’t work; and at worst, they are contributing to the spread of the virus.

According to The Epoch Times analysis, the Covid infection rate in US counties that have a vaccination rate of 62-95% is 23% higher than the Counties that have a vaccination rate of just 11-40%.

The data showed that the least vaccinated counties tended to be on the smaller side, with an average population of around 20,000 – much less than the 330,000 average among the most vaccinated counties.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that a recent data from over 5,000 Walgreens stores, the unvaccinated have the lowest incidence of COVID.

The unvaccinated show an 18% COVID rate. This is lower than those with 3 doses of the vaccine who have a 19.2 COVID rate.
Those with three doses, with their last dose taken over five months ago, have the highest COVID rate at 31.3%.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Politics Reprints from others. Science Uncategorized

Pfizer quietly admits it will never manufacture original FDA approved COVID vaccines Company claims it is manufacturing Comirnaty product with new formula.

This article is from The Dossier.

The August 23, 2021 FDA approval of Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine was a cause for celebration. Marked as a turning point in the battle against COVID19, the announcement was highly publicized by the Biden Administration with the clear intention to extinguish “vaccine hesitancy” and boost uptake.

It was celebrated as a cause for national relief, and many Americans arrived at their local pharmacies under the impression, via government and pharmaceutical propaganda, that they were receiving an FDA-approved COVID vaccine. Yet that legally distinct product, as we know it, never existed. And now we know, via Pfizer, that it will never exist.

 

For the uninitiated:

Comirnaty is a legally distinct product from the emergency use authorization (EUA) shots, and It has never made its way to market. For months on end, no such vaccine has ever become available. Those who received the “Pfizer shot(s)” have been injected with the emergency use authorization (EUA) version of the shots. See my piece in The Dossier for more info:

 
Shell Game? There remains no FDA approved COVID vaccine in the United States
I fact checked the fact checkers and couldn’t believe what I found. Despite the corporate press, Big Pharma, and the federal government telling us otherwise, it is absolutely true that there is no FDA approved COVID-19 vaccine available in the United States today. And there are no plans to make one available any time soon…

Read more

The information operation succeeded. There was indeed an FDA approved vaccine, at least on paper, but you couldn’t get it.

When originally confronted with this ordeal, Pfizer labeled this issue an inventory question that had nothing to do with the legal distinction between an experimental EUA product and an FDA-approved vaccine. Up until just weeks ago, this was the statement up on the CDC website via Pfizer:

“Pfizer received FDA BLA license on 8/23/2021 for its COVID-19 vaccine for use in individuals 16 and older (COMIRNATY).  At that time, the FDA published a BLA package insert that included the approved new COVID-19 vaccine tradename COMIRNATY and listed 2 new NDCs (0069-1000-03, 0069-1000-02) and images of labels with the new tradename.

At present, Pfizer does not plan to produce any product with these new NDCs and labels over the next few months while EUA authorized product is still available and being made available for U.S. distribution.  As such, the CDC, AMA, and drug compendia may not publish these new codes until Pfizer has determined when the product will be produced with the BLA labels.”

In May, Pfizer updated its statement to mention a December 2021 licensed Comirnaty product, which was granted a license four months after the highly-publicized August FDA press release.

And just last week, Pfizer finally acknowledged that its original licensed product will never be distributed. In an unreported update on the CDC website, Pfizer told the agency:

“Pfizer received initial FDA BLA license on 8/23/2021 for its COVID-19 vaccine for use in individuals 16 and older (COMIRNATY). At that time, the FDA published a BLA package insert that included the approved new COVID-19 vaccine tradename COMIRNATY and listed 2 new NDCs (0069-1000-03, 0069-1000-02) and images of labels with the new tradename. These NDCs will not be manufactured. Only NDCs for the subsequently BLA approved tris-sucrose formulation will be produced.”

The key distinction between the originally approved formulation and the tris-sucrose formulation is that — according to manufacturers — the latter can be held for a much longer period of time outside of an ultra cold freezer. These freezers cost over $10,000 a piece and each unit uses as much energy per day as an average American household. Improper storage can render the mRNA unstable.

Notably, the clinical trials for the Pfizer shot were conducted without the modified tris-sucrose ingredient. Given the partisan nature of Pfizer, the corporate media, government health bureaucracies, and your correspondent’s lack of expertise in this area, it is unclear whether this is significant.

Another notable thing to look out for in the coming days and weeks is the possibility that the subsequently FDA approved product finally becomes available in the United States. In recent days, the CDC removed the language of “not orderable at this time” above the description of both Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax.

Additionally, as reported by Uncover DC, the Defense Department appears to be in the early stages of ordering what it has interpreted as a legally required minimum of Comirnaty in order to continue its mRNA mandate of American service members.

Categories
Science

‘Mind blowing’ ancient settlements uncovered in the Amazon

The urban centers are the first to be discovered in the region, challenging archaeological dogma.

Freda Kreier for Nature.com

Aerial view of a forest islet in the Llanos de Moxos, Santa Ana del Yacuma, Beni, Bolivia.

Researchers uncovered ancient urban centers on forested mounds in the Bolivian Amazon Basin.Credit: Roland Seitre/Nature Picture Library

Mysterious mounds in the southwest corner of the Amazon Basin were once the site of ancient urban settlements, scientists have discovered. Using a remote-sensing technology to map the terrain from the air, they found that, starting about 1,500 years ago, ancient Amazonians built and lived in densely populated centers, featuring 22-meter-tall earthen pyramids, that were encircled by kilometers of elevated roadways.

The complexity of these settlements is “mind blowing”, says team member Heiko Prümers, an archaeologist at the German Archaeological Institute headquartered in Berlin.

“This is the first clear evidence that there were urban societies in this part of the Amazon Basin,” says Jonas Gregorio de Souza, an archaeologist at the Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, Spain. The study adds to a growing body of research indicating that the Amazon — long thought to have been pristine wilderness before the arrival of Europeans — was home to advanced societies well before that. The discovery was published on 25 May in Nature1.

A shift in thinking

Humans have lived in the Amazon Basin — a vast river-drainage system roughly the size of the continental United States — for around 10,000 years. Researchers thought that before the arrival of Europeans in the sixteenth century, all Amazonians lived in small, nomadic tribes that had little impact on the world around them. And although early European visitors described a landscape filled with towns and villages, later explorers were unable to find these sites.

The settlement beneath: Arial image of a site in Bolivia showing an ancient urban centre beneath dense vegetation.

Source: Ref. 1

By the twentieth century, archaeologists had yet to confirm the rumors, and argued that the Amazon’s nutrient-poor soil was unable to support large-scale agriculture, and that it would have prevented tropical civilizations — similar to those found in central America and southeast Asia — from arising in the Amazon. By the 2000s, however, archaeological opinion was beginning to shift. Some researchers suggested2 that unusually high concentrations of domesticated plants, along with patches of unusually nutrient-rich soil that could have been created by people, might indicate that ancient Amazonians had indeed shaped their environment.

The hypothesis gained steam when, in 2018, archaeologists reported3 hundreds of large, geometric mounds that had been uncovered because of deforestation in the southern Amazon rain forest. These structures hinted at ancient organized societies capable of thriving in one location for years — but direct evidence of settlements was lacking.

In 1999, Prümers began studying a set of mounds in the Bolivian part of the Amazon Basin, outside the thick rain forest. There, a multitude of tree-covered mounds rise above a lowland area that floods during the rainy season.

Previous digs had revealed that these ‘forest islands’ contained traces of human habitation, including the remains of the mysterious Casarabe culture, which appeared around AD 500. During one excavation, Prümers and his colleagues realized that they had found what looked like a wall, indicating that a permanent settlement had once occupied the area. The researchers also found graves, platforms and other indications of a complex society. But dense vegetation made it difficult for them to use conventional methods to survey the site.

What lies beneath

By the 2010s, a technique called lidar — a remote-sensing technology that uses lasers to generate a 3D image of the ground below — had come into vogue with archaeologists. In 2012, a lidar survey of a valley in Honduras helped lead to the rediscovery of an ancient pre-Columbian city rumored to exist in the area. The jungle had completely overtaken the settlement since it was abandoned in the fifteenth century, making it all but impossible to see from the air without lidar.

Prümers and his colleagues took advantage of lidar in 2019, when they flew a helicopter equipped with the technology over six areas near sites confirmed to have been occupied by the Casarabe people. The team got more than it bargained for, with lidar revealing the size and shape of 26 settlements, including 11 the researchers hadn’t been looking for — a monumental task that would have taken 400 years to survey by conventional means, Prümers says.

Two of the urban centers each covered an area of more than 100 hectares — three times the size of Vatican City. The lidar images revealed walled compounds with broad terraces rising 6 meters above the ground. Conical pyramids made of earth towered above one end of the terraces (see ‘The settlement beneath’). People probably lived in the areas around the terraces and traveled along the causeways that connected the sites to one another.

“We have this image of Amazonia as a green desert,” Prümers says. But given that civilizations rose and thrived in other tropical areas, he notes, “Why shouldn’t something like that exist here?”

Mysteries remain

Why these settlements were abandoned after 900 years is still a mystery. Radiocarbon dating has revealed that the Casarabe disappeared around 1400.

Prümers points out that lidar images revealed reservoirs in the settlements, perhaps indicating that this part of the world wasn’t always wet — an environmental shift that might have driven people away. However, consistent pollen records reveal4 that maize (corn) was grown in the area continuously for thousands of years, indicating sustainable agricultural practices.

At the very least, the discovery of long-lost Amazonian societies “changes the general perspective people have of Amazonian archaeology”, says Eduardo Neves, an archaeologist at the University of São Paulo in Brazil. Present-day logging and farming in the Amazon Basin are almost certainly destroying important archaeological sites that have yet to be discovered, he says, but a growing interest in Amazonian archaeology could lead to the protection of vulnerable places.

These discoveries also counter the narrative that Indigenous peoples were passive inhabitants of the Amazon Basin before the arrival of Europeans. “The people who lived there changed the landscape forever,” Neves says.

Updates & Corrections

  • Correction 26 May 2022: An earlier version of this story said that there are hundreds of tree-covered mounds rising above a lowland area in the Bolivian Amazon. Some estimates suggest there are many more than that.

References

  1. Prümers, H., Betancourt, C. J., Iriarte, J., Robinson, M. & Schaich, M. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04780-4 (2022). Article  Google Scholar

  2. Neves, E. G. & Heckenberger, M. J. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 48, 371–388 (2019). Article  Google Scholar

  3. de Souza, J. G. et al. Nature Commun. 9, 1125 (2018).Article  Google Scholar

  4. Carson, J. F. et al. Holocene 25, 1285–1300 (2015).Article  Google Scholar

Download references

 

Categories
Opinion Science

Being Special Isn’t So Special -Mark Manson

Don’t let attention and glory be your main motivators in life. If you can’t find pleasure in the simple or the mundane, then you won’t find it anywhere.

There’s a paradox that is stumping psychologists right now and it’s this: Over the past 50+ years, despite the standard of living rising dramatically in the western world, happiness has stayed level, while mental illnesses, anxiety disorders, narcissism, and depression have all gone up.

When you study marketing, the first thing you learn is that fear sells. If you make a person feel inadequate or inferior, they will shut up and buy something in order to feel better. A capitalist system markets to everyone constantly, therefore it promotes a society where people constantly feel inadequate and inferior.

It’s funny, a lot of people who travel to the third-world claim that people are “happier” there. They often follow it up with some banal statement about materialism and how we’d all be so much happier if we knew how to live with less.

This is completely wrong.

Poor people in developing societies aren’t happier, they’re simply less anxious and less stressed. People in the developing world don’t care how many friends you have or if you bought the latest hot item or not. They’re much more family- and community-oriented. They’re also more socially accepting and less socially anxious simply because they have to be. It’s how they survive. When you take hyper-individualistic westerners — especially ones who have killed themselves at a desk job to make a ton of money — when they’re exposed to this, they perceive it as being a “happier” or “healthier” way of life. In some ways, it is. But at the same time, it’s exactly what our system gave up to gain its abundance of material wealth.

The philosopher Alain de Botton has written about this in his book Status Anxiety. In centuries past, he says, people knew where they fit into the social order. If you were born a peasant, you knew you were a peasant. If you were born a lord, you knew you were a lord. There was no mobility or opportunity, and so there was no stress about getting ahead. You weren’t responsible for your birthright, so you accepted it and moved on.

But in a meritocratic society, something changes. In a meritocracy, if you’re poor, or you gain success and then lose it, it’s not an accident. It’s worse. It’s your fault. You’re the failure. You’re the one who lost everything. And this causes people to live shackled with a constant fear of inadequacy; all the world’s hustle and bustle motivated by a baseline status anxiety.

De Botton doesn’t argue that feudal societies or poor societies were somehow better. He simply makes the point that when a society goes from feudal and destitute to meritocratic and wealthy, the price its people pay for that increased standard of living and social mobility is an increase in stress and anxiety.

After all, the greater the opportunity one has, the greater the anxiety of somehow squandering it. Thus, we stress: we need to make better grades, to get a better job, to date more attractive people, to have cooler hobbies, to make more friends, to be more liked and more popular. Simply being content with what we have isn’t good enough anymore. In fact, for some it’s tantamount to giving up.

Today we live with more information than any other point in human history. According to Google, the internet produces as much information every two years as the rest of all of human history combined. And all of that information is theoretically instantly accessible by us all. It’s truly amazing.

But when you combine a capitalist system with an infinite flow of information, a side effect is a population who is reminded of the infinite amount of ways that it’s not good enough.

In the early 1900s, a phrase became popular, “Keeping up with the Joneses.” It described the pernicious effect of consumerism. The neighbors got a new car, so now we feel like we need a new car. Your brother-in-law landed seasons tickets to the local baseball team, so now you need season tickets. Your coworker just booked a trip to China, so now you need to travel somewhere exotic.

Now, most of us aren’t douchey enough to feel these types of envy consciously. But unfortunately the “Keeping up with the Joneses” afflicts us all, whether we realize it or not. As humans, we are unconsciously measuring ourselves up against one another constantly. It unfortunately plays a large part in how we define ourselves, whether we want it to or not.

Now imagine that there are two million Joneses to keep up with, and suddenly you have the internet.

This isn’t an argument against capitalism. And it’s definitely not an argument against the internet. I’m simply making observations and stating facts. In today’s world, it is impossible to not be reminded of how somebody, somewhere, is doing something that is much cooler than you, and be reminded of it constantly.

In a bitter irony, through open-sourcing information, the internet has also open-sourced inadequacy and insecurity.

One example: The whole “Make Money from Home, Travel the World” thing that Tim Ferriss started over a decade ago. Truth be told, it’s an extreme lifestyle that is probably not emotionally sustainable in the long-term, and likely doesn’t suit most people’s personalities. Most people who give it a go end up giving it up after a few years, including Ferriss himself.

Yet if you look around online, you’d think the concept cures cancer or something. I have probably half a dozen people who pop onto my Facebook newsfeed all the time going on about the merits of creating your own career path, following your passion, building a personal brand, living off the grid, doing something crazy and then blogging about it. Ironically, I think many of the people saying this stuff are still living at home with their parents and not making any money. It’s almost like they’re trying to convince themselves more than anyone else.

I’m special. I’m unique. I’m doing something different. Look at me. I’m different, right?

Everybody I know who actually lives this way generally shuts up about it because they find talking about it too much alienates people back home. Being special is nice, but that’s not where our real needs get met. It’s not a sufficient metric for our overall well-being.

If everyone quit their desk job and tried to monetize a blog about quilting or created an app that counts how many times you pass gas each day, the economy would come to a standstill. Some people are wired to be loners and eccentrics. And others are wired for routine. Some enjoy taking risks. Some like stability.

There’s something admirable about finding satisfaction in the simple, everyday pleasures of life, and it’s becoming harder and harder to do. We’re bombarded every day: here’s the brave soldier who saved a school bus full of kids with nothing but a crowbar and fishing line; here’s the 30-something billionaire who is going to cure aging so we can all live forever; here’s the 12-year-old who can play Stravinksy’s Rite of Spring on seven different instruments with her feet.

The implication is always the same: What have YOU done lately?

Oh, you flossed today? Way to go, you lazy sack of shit. Now let me just retweet that real quick.

If you can’t find pleasure in the simple or the mundane, then you won’t find pleasure anywhere.

As they say, wherever you go, there you are. Being special isn’t so special. You will still feel frustrated. You will still feel lonely. You will still feel like you could have done more.

Don’t sell yourself out for the sake of attention and false glory. Not that attention and glory are wrong, but they should not be prime motivators that drive your life.

Instead, focus on simplicity. On nuance. Slow down. Breathe. Smile. You don’t need to prove anything to anybody. Including yourself. Think about that for a minute and let it sink in:

You don’t have to prove anything to anybody, including yourself.

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Pandemic Corruption COVID Drugs Science

That OTHER Global COVID Summit

17,000 physicians and medical scientists make a plea to restore scientific integrity and end the national emergency

While global bureaucrats were meeting on May 12, 2022 at a summit hosted by President Biden to discuss how to “turn vaccines into vaccinations,” and how to increase demand for unwanted injections, another COVID summit was taking place.

The alternate summit focused on some big questions: Why have patients been denied life-saving medical treatments? Why are we not researching the damage being caused by the injections? Why are medical professionals still being censored by media companies, Big Tech and their own institutions?

The group known as the Global COVID Summit represents 17,000 physicians and medical scientists from all over the world who have signed on to a declaration based on the following ten foundational principles:

1.    We declare and the data confirm that the COVID-19 experimental genetic therapy injections must end.

2.    We declare doctors should not be blocked from providing life-saving medical treatment.

3.    We declare the state of national emergency, which facilitates corruption and extends the pandemic, should be immediately terminated.

4.    We declare medical privacy should never again be violated, and all travel and social restrictions must cease.

5.    We declare masks are not and have never been effective protection against an airborne respiratory virus in the community setting.

6.    We declare funding and research must be established for vaccination damage, death and suffering.

7.    We declare no opportunity should be denied, including education, career, military service or medical treatment, over unwillingness to take an injection.

8.    We declare that first amendment violations and medical censorship by government, technology and media companies should cease, and the Bill of Rights be upheld.

9.    We declare that Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, and their enablers, withheld and willfully omitted safety and effectiveness information from patients and physicians, and should be immediately indicted for fraud.

10.  We declare government and medical agencies must be held accountable.

Read more and watch the entire summit here or watch an in-depth interview with some of the Global COVID Summit doctors here.


With dozens of previously healthy young athletes literally dropping dead after getting jabbed, and hundreds of people seriously ill after getting jabbed, the Biden regime has now approved it for children — statistically the LEAST likely to contract Covid-19 — as young as FIVE years old.

WHY?

Categories
Science

Supermassive black hole at center of Milky Way seen for first time — Science Corner

An image of the supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way has been captured, giving the first direct glimpse of the turbulent heart of our galaxy.

The black hole itself, known as Sagittarius A*, pronounced “Sagittarius A-Star,” cannot be seen because no light or matter can escape its gravitational grip. But its shadow is traced out by a glowing, fuzzy ring of light and matter that is swirling on the precipice at close to the speed of light before its eventual plunge into oblivion.

The image was captured by the Event Horizon telescope (EHT), a network of eight radio telescopes spanning locations from Antarctica to Spain and Chile, which produced the first image of a black hole, in a galaxy called Messier 87, in 2019.

Prof Sera Markoff, an astrophysicist at the University of Amsterdam and co-chair of the EHT Science Council, said: “The Milky Way’s black hole was our main target, it’s our closest supermassive black hole and it’s the reason we set out to do this thing in the first place. It’s been an 100-year search for these things and so scientifically it’s a huge deal.”

The image provides compelling proof that there is a black hole at the center of the Milky Way, which had been the working assumption of mainstream astronomy. But a minority of scientists had continued to speculate about the possibility of other exotic objects such as boson stars or clumps of dark matter.

“I’m personally happy about the fact it really drills home the fact that there is definitely a black hole at the center of our galaxy,” said Dr Ziri Younsi, a member of the EHT collaboration who is based at University College London. “It’s a turbulent, chaotic and quite violent environment. It made me think, ‘Wow, we’re quite lucky to live at the edge of the galaxy actually.’”

To the untrained eye, the latest image might appear similar to that of M87, which is 55m light years from Earth, but the observations are already giving entirely new scientific insights. And, Younsi said, there was an emotional, as well as purely scientific, value in finally seeing the enigmatic object about which our home galaxy revolves. “It’s another doughnut, but it’s our doughnut,” he said.

A resolution the equivalent of seeing a bagel on the moon was required to bring it into focus.

Despite being local in astronomical terms (still 26,000 light years away) observing SgrA* turned out to be more challenging than anticipated and the team has spent five years analyzing data acquired during fortuitously clear skies across several continents in April 2017. Sagittarius A* is more than a thousand times smaller and less massive than M87*, meaning a resolution the equivalent of seeing a bagel on the moon was required to bring it into focus.

Its size means dust and gas is orbiting it in a matter of minutes, rather than weeks, so the image was constantly changing from one observation to the next. Markoff compared the challenge to trying to capture a puppy chasing its tail using a camera with a slow shutter speed. And the scientists had to peer through the galactic plain, meaning radiation from all the intervening stars had to be filtered out. Some combination of these factors – and possibly some extreme black hole phenomenon – explain the bright blobs in the image.

“We didn’t anticipate how evasive and elusive it would be,” said Younsi. “It was really a tough picture to take – it’s hard to overstate that.”

Four million times more massive than our Sun.

The EHT picks up radiation emitted by particles within the accretion disc that are heated to billions of degrees as they orbit the black hole at close to the speed of light, before vanishing into the central vortex. The blotchy halo in the image shows light bent by the powerful gravity of the black hole, which is four million times more massive than our Sun.

The latest observations are already giving intriguing hints about the nature of our own black hole. Simulations based on the data hint that our black hole’s angle of rotation is not neatly aligned with the galactic plain, but is off-kilter by about 30 degrees. The observations also suggest that SgrA* is in a dormant state, in contrast with some black holes, including M87, which feature vast, powerful jets that blast light and matter from the black hole’s poles into intergalactic space. “If a big star fell in, which would happen every 10,000 years, that would wake it up for a short amount of time and we’d see things brighten up,” said Markoff.

Ultimately, scientists hope that observing these competing processes in black holes – gobbling up nearby material versus blasting it outwards into space – could help answer a chicken-and-egg style question about the evolution of galaxies.

“It’s an open question in galactic formation and evolution. We don’t know which came first, the galaxy or black hole,” said Prof Carole Mundell, an astrophysicist at the University of Bath who is not part of the EHT collaboration.

“From the technology perspective it’s mind-blowing that we can do this,” she said of the latest images.

The EHT team’s results are being published on Thursday in a special issue of the Astrophysical Journal Letters.

Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Science

Better Late Than Never

Four positive signs we’re seeing as we move into year 3 of this pandemic

Here we are in May 2022. We made it through the “winter of death.” The springtime birds are singing, the sun is shining and we’re feeling hopeful… So let’s briefly take stock of how things are looking, shall we?

1)    The FLCCC and CDC found something to agree on

It took a while. A lot longer than any of us thought it would, in fact. And although it wasn’t how we imagined it might go, and certainly not how we suggested, the Centers for Disease Control recently came to a bold conclusion — one the FLCCC has been championing all along: “Early treatment works.”

Let’s be clear and completely transparent. The CDC didn’t recommend FLCCC protocols, nor are the treatments they recommend ones that FLCCC endorses.

Still, we agreed on something: COVID is treatable. Let’s take our wins where we can.

2)    States are starting to push back

Legislatures in 30 states – 60% of the country — have now proposed bills either putting limits on the authority of health boards to punish doctors who promote alternative treatments, or explicitly enabling the promotion of those treatments.

As Drs. Kory and Marik say, the federal public health agencies have been captured by Big Pharma, so our only hope is in individual states fighting back. And state legislators will only do that if they hear the voice of the people — i.e., you!

Let’s have a look at some recent advances:

This doesn’t mean you can roll right into a pharmacy in Nashville or Nashua and grab some ivermectin off the shelf just yet, but after two years of a near-daily struggle just to be allowed to treat COVID, these are small victories.  Thanks to the dedication, sacrifice and hard work of many people around this country, change is beginning to manifest — slowly but surely.

Thank you for reading The FLCCC Alliance Community. This post is public so feel free to share it.

3)    Mainstream media are inventing new reasons why ivermectin works

Wendy Zukerman hosts a podcast called ‘Science Vs’ and she recently devoted an episode to what she calls “the wild and bizarre tale of … ivermectin.”

Of the 82 studies from around the world that have now looked at IVM and COVID, Zukerman focused on just two – the now discredited Elgazzar paper and the recently released and highly suspicious TOGETHER trial.

Here’s the conclusion her podcast came to:

“Ivermectin didn’t work”

We all know that’s not true. Even the TOGETHER trial’s principal investigator, Edward Mills, knows it’s not true:

“I advocate that, actually, there is a clear signal that IVM works in COVID patients, just that our study didn’t achieve significance. I really don’t view our study as negative… I think if we had continued randomizing a few hundred more patients, it would have likely been significant.”

According to Zukerman, having a nice doctor like Pierre Kory, who gives you a drug they really believe will work, maybe just makes you feel better. Hear her out:

She cites a previous episode of her own show from 2019 on placebos to back this up.

Another podcaster suggests some people were going to get better from COVID anyway, so doctors who get results by prescribing ivermectin can’t really claim the drug is having an effect. He explains:

If it’s true that a lot of people will have a mild case and recover on their own, then it’s hard to understand why vaccines should be mandatory and why people should be encouraged to take an expensive medicine like Paxlovid with its many drug-drug interactions. But that’s a topic for another time.

Other people who still struggle to “explain” the effectiveness of ivermectin, demonstrated in study after study, put it down to the fact that many of those studies were conducted in places where people are infected with worms.

Or, it could just be that ivermectin works for COVID… Go figure.

4)    There is a growing understanding of how clinical trials can be corrupted or designed to fail

Thanks to the tireless work of researchers and investigators like Alexandros Marinos, Phil Harper, Steve Kirsch, Pierre Kory, Flavio Cadegiani and many others, people are gaining a better view into the inner workings of clinical trials and medical journals.

Sadly, what’s being revealed is not a pretty sight.

The story of how Andrew Hill was likely coerced into changing the conclusions of his meta-analysis on ivermectin, and the many ways in which the much-touted TOGETHER trial was based on bad science, are now well documented.

Will this awareness change anything? Maybe, maybe not. As a society, we may have become indifferent to the truth if that truth threatens to shatter our illusions. But as a group of people with a moral conscience, the FLCCC will not stop exposing lies when we see them. We will not stop encouraging critical thinking. We will not stop pursuing solutions for a better world.

For over two years, the members of the FLCCC have endured assaults on our character, integrity, personal and professional reputations, and livelihoods. We have had ample opportunity to turn and walk away, to acquiesce, to give in.

But we didn’t.

We will never give up on our patients. We will never give up on fighting for safe, science-based solutions to one the greatest medical challenges we have ever faced.

We will be here when others see the light and decide to come join us. We won’t even complain (much) if others try to co-opt our ideas and take credit for them. Treating patients and saving lives is in our DNA and will always come before divisive politics and crony capitalism.

Our goal is simple: developing affordable COVID-19 treatments powered by safe, off-patent, repurposed drugs. All are welcome to join. And if you can’t get behind that, then may we politely ask that you at least get out of the way?