Category: Science

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

Looking. Testimony of Lies: CDC Director Rochelle Walensky Perjured Herself Twice Before Congress

Testimony of Lies? Vigilant Fox Photo

Visits: 25

 

Originally Published on DailyClout.io

“Dr. Walensky seemed less cool in this appearance for Congress. This is the least composed and the most nervous, I feel, like I’ve seen this woman who’s usually kind of cool as a cucumber,” noted conservative podcaster Emerald Robinson Thursday. She also “perjured herself twice,” expressed special guest and DailyClout CEO Dr. Naomi Wolf.

The soon-to-be former CDC Director (June 30), Rochelle Walensky, testified before Congress for two hours on Tuesday. Here are some of the “key takeaways,” as provided by the Committee on Oversight and Accountability:

Key Takeaways

• CDC Director Walensky confirmed that the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) promoted prolonged school closures that harmed America’s children.

• When America faced a public health crisis and turned to the CDC for help and guidance, the CDC provided misguided, unscientific, confusing, and at times blatantly false answers.

• AFT President Randi Weingarten had a direct line to CDC Director Rochelle Walensky’s personal and professional cellphones — raising further questions about potential political influence at the CDC.

• Dr. Rochelle Walensky testified that she spoke in her capacity as CDC Director during a White House briefing in February 2021. The Biden White House’s claim that her statements were made in her “personal” capacity when discussing school reopenings and vaccinations for teachers was false.

• Public health officials and organizations — including the CDC — must be held accountable for their failures and false statements during the pandemic in order to earn back the trust of Americans.

• The CDC needs structural reform to address current information and infrastructure issues, lack of transparency within the agency, and processes surrounding guidance publication.

One moment that garnered a lot of attention was Dr. Walensky’s exchange with Rep. James Comer (R-KY).

Rep. Comer asked Dr. Walensky several times about the CDC’s role in pressuring social media companies like Facebook, now Meta, to censor opinions that ran contrary to the CDC’s, to which Dr. Walensky continually answered, “That topic is one that is under litigation in the courts, so I will not be speaking to that.”

Dr. Naomi Wolf responded to such statements. “Dr. Walensky, when she said, I can’t speak to that because it’s under litigation, two Attorneys General, one from Missouri, and one from Louisiana, have sued and disclosed that, in fact, she the CDC, she right there, that woman was colluding with Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, Twitter, DHS, and the White House to censor information, including from yours truly right here in June of 2021, to warn women that there were menstrual problems subsequent to this injection, which, of course, has resulted two years later in fertility problems.”

“She did that, and he [Mark Zuckerberg] did that,” Dr. Wolf continued. “And now that the truth is coming out because of people like you and me and the hard work that we’re doing, and our 3500 volunteers. Now they’re like, ‘Oh, really bad that the government pushed us to censor things that might have been true.’ Well, yes. Mark Zuckerberg. They were true. And he’s injured so many women and babies and killed babies as a result of censoring that. And when Dr. Walensky said it’s under litigation, we’re suing her. George Smith, our lawyer in Ohio, sued her, and many other people are suing her for having lied and injured Americans as a result.”

Dr. Walensky was also “jumpy,” observed Dr. Wolf. “My husband’s a body language expert, and so it’s interesting watching this with him.” The man who appeared to be Dr. Walensky’s lawyer in the background often covered his mouth when Dr. Walensky had “blown it.” “And she blew it a couple of times,” remarked Dr. Wolf, but she also “lied twice.”

Here are those two lies, as outlined by Dr. Naomi Wolf.

Lie One: when Dr. Walensky stated that she didn’t know the COVID shots didn’t stop transmission when she touted “95% effective” to the American people.

“Well, our experts, our report [73] has shown that she knew perfectly well she was lying at the time she said that to Americans — that our experts found that Pfizer knew in November of 2020, which means she knew because she had the same documents, that the vaccines did not work to stop COVID,” stated Dr. Wolf.

“And in fact, Pfizer got rid of [at least] 200 vaccinated COVID-sick people in their trials in order falsely to make the claim that they were 95% effective. But the fact that they got rid of those 200-[plus] sick people is right there in the documents that Rochelle Walensky was given.”

Dr. Chris Flowers, MD, attests that if those 200-plus people who were excluded from Pfizer’s clinical trials with COVID-like symptoms had been included, it would have shown that Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots actually had “negative efficacy.” Dr. Chris Flowers breaks down the data in this interview.

Lie Two: when Dr. Walensky stated you couldn’t transmit COVID while vaccinated.

“This was the basis for the illegal mandates,” lamented Dr. Wolf. “Well, she knew perfectly well at the time she said it that that was a lie. And in fact, the Pfizer Documents show, as of November 2020, that the vaccines didn’t work to stop transmission — that there was vaccine failure and failure of efficacy. So she categorically lied to Congress twice,” Dr. Wolf asserted.

In fact, Dutch MEP Rob Roos got a Pfizer spokesperson (J. Small) to admit that the pharmaceutical giant never confirmed its COVID shots stopped transmission because it had to “move at the speed of science.”

More Lies: Dr. Walensky’s verbal exchange with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-GA).

Dr. Wolf expressed she was “frustrated watching this hearing because all of the evidence that these interrogators on the right needed is in our Pfizer Documents book. For the most part, they didn’t ask the right questions or the right follow-up questions, except for Marjorie Taylor Greene.”

Here’s the summarized transcript of that interaction:

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE: “I’d also like to talk to you on behalf of all the pregnant women, not people, as you call them. This has also been ignored, the amount of miscarriages and stillbirths that increased drastically due to your advice to get vaccinated. Pregnant women, again, not people. But my question for you today, Dr. Walensky, is now that you’re going to be leaving the CDC pretty soon, what job are you going to take? Are you going to be on the board of either Pfizer or Moderna? Because you’ve done one hell of a job at making sure that they’ve made a lot of money. And I yield back.”

ROCHELLE WALENSKY: “Thank you for that question. Maybe first, I will comment that CDC is not responsible for the purchase of vaccines. So I can’t speak to all of the economics that you spoke to. I do want to talk [for] a minute about the Vaccine Adverse Reporting — that Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. So that system is intended for any person who has gotten a vaccine if they have an untoward event after that vaccine, whether or not it is related to the vaccine they report. It is intended to have an overreporting. All of the vaccines — not all — most of the vaccines that were being given. Remember, we gave 676 million doses of the vaccine. Any adverse event, if you got hit by a truck after you got your vaccine, that was reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. We at CDC have a responsibility to comb through every single one of them to review the medical charts and to see if they are related. We review all of the things that come into the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. I’d be happy to have our staff educate your staff on the —”

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE: “I don’t want my staff educated. You should educate the American people about what you’ve done [with] 1.5 million reports because they feel like you’ve done nothing and continue to say ‘safe and effective.’”

ROCHELLE WALENSKY: “Maybe I will just close my saying I don’t have plans after I step down.”

“So many lies. Lies upon lies,” responded Dr. Naomi Wolf.

“She’s using her education, her access, her resources to hurt and injure and kill people and lie to the American people before Congress.”

“VAERS is actually not designed to overreport,” Dr. Wolf countered. “According to Harvard University, in her hometown of Boston, it underreports by a factor of 1% to 10%. And even the most established scientists and healthcare institutions accept that VAERS underreports.”

“Secondly, if they’re tasked with looking into every single one of those reports to VAERS, why on earth did they not look at that gigantic spike in miscarriages? Dr. Wolf asked. “They didn’t do that,” she lamented. “So even if she claims, oh, all these [reports] — it wasn’t the vaccine. She doesn’t know it wasn’t a vaccine because they did not look. There are no studies that the CDC ran to look at why the spiking of reports of miscarriage and spontaneous abortion coinciding with the rollout of vaccine were so massive.”

“Third,” Dr. Wolf continued. “What she’s lying about is that she knows exactly what caused those spontaneous abortions and miscarriages because she has the same paperwork from Pfizer that we have. And there’s a section in the Pfizer documents where there’s an 80 percent miscarriage rate after women got vaccinated. And there’s another section where — and this is in report 69 — where Pfizer shows that two of these tiny babies in utero who were delivered early, meaning spontaneously aborted after their moms got vaccinated and died.”

“The reason for that was, in Pfizer’s words, ‘transplacental’ exposure to the vaccine,” Dr. Wolf attested.

“Transplacental exposure to the vaccine,” she repeated. “She [Dr. Walensky] had these documents. She knew what they said. And this was turned in a report to the White House, the CDC, and the FDA on April 20, 2021. On April 23, 2021, that woman got up in front of the White House at a press conference and said to the pregnant women of America that she recommended that they get vaccinated. She said the vaccine was safe and effective for pregnancy, and she recommended that pregnant women get vaccinated to protect their babies. And she said [that] there’s never a bad time to get vaccinated before your pregnancy, during your pregnancy, or after you’re pregnant. And she knew this report from Pfizer that showed that babies were dying in utero due to transplacental exposure, Pfizer’s words. And that they were being poisoned by the mRNA and spike protein in their mother’s breast milk.”

“That woman murdered babies, and she knew it,” asserted Dr. Wolf. “And five days after we posted [Pfizer] Report 69, she announced her resignation. So that’s what Congress should be asking her about. Did she know that? And if so, why did she tell pregnant women of America to take something that would kill their babies and poison them if they breastfed them?”

That famous Pfizer Report 69, which was published five days before Dr. Walensky’s resignation announcement, is available for free, along with all the other Pfizer Documents Reports on dailyclout.io.

Pfizer Report 73, which details how Pfizer knew by November 2020 that its mRNA COVID shot was neither safe nor effective, is available here. That particular report is a highly-technical read, but one of the authors, Dr. Chris Flowers, MD, summarizes the main points in this interview:

And if you’d like to support the work of Dr. Naomi Wolf, Amy Kelly, and the 3500 DailyClout/War Room volunteers, please order a copy of the Pfizer Documents Book for yourself, a family member, a friend, your doctor, or your local representative. The greatest crime in human history is all thoroughly documented here:

 

Loading

130
Post Views: 251
Categories
Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. Science

Climate change didn’t cause Canada’s wildfires. Lightning has been starting forest fires for millennia.

Visits: 20

Climate change didn’t cause Canada’s wildfires. Lightning has been starting forest fires for millennia.

Is the hazy stuff out there smoke billowing down from Québec, or hot air emitted from smoggy-brained politicians and journalists? Chuck Schumer told the Senate on Wednesday that the smoke drifting over the Eastern Seaboard was caused by climate change. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez said it showed the urgency of going greener faster. Proof of carbon pollution, lectured the Canadian minister of the environment. A stark reminder of climate change, intoned Biden.

Every news organization and weather app out there suddenly became experts on a new hazard — not smoke or fire, well-known phenomenons that have been extensively documented throughout history — but a new threat, both more nebulous and more ominous: “air quality.” Electronic devices and weather stations began making unsolicited “air quality” reports. The New York Post made melodramatic comparisons with the aftermath of 9/11. Other outlets published analyses of the health risks of smoky air for pets and those in vulnerable states of health. The CBC, Canada’s state broadcaster/doomsayer, assured everyone who would listen that “air quality warnings are likely to become more common with climate change.” Climate change? Or social change — to be imposed via radical environmental policy? And what’s next, “air quality” sirens that urge you to duck for cover when a diesel vehicle rolls by?

The fires in Québec and Ontario are real — especially for those forced to evacuate their homes. So too is the unpleasantness of smoke blowing across eastern Canada and the United States. And just as real, unfortunately, is the propensity of politicians and their media cheerleaders to capitalize on human suffering in order to move society in their preferred direction: in this case, the fool’s gold of net-zero emissions.

But Canadian wildfires aren’t caused by emissions. Wildfires are as normal as thunderstorms. They form part of the natural life cycle of North American forests. While of course some fires are caused by human carelessness or arson, most of the fires currently ravaging Québec and northeastern Ontario are believed to be caused by lightning. Hate to shock the climate zealots, but lightning has been starting forest fires since long before the Romans began using fossil fuels to heat their baths in early Britain.

The whole article is here.

Loading

75
Post Views: 141
Categories
Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science

Medical News Round-up.

Medicine looked at from both sides.

Visits: 16

Medical News Round-up.

Loading

95
Post Views: 237
Categories
Biden Pandemic COVID Drugs Life Science Stupid things people say or do.

White House to invest $5 billion in next-generation COVID vaccines. Here’s why we [don’t] need new ones.

The old vaxes haven't killed/injured a high enough percentage of the people.

Visits: 20

Story by Karen Weintraub, USA TODAY

Bracketed comments by Phoenix

The Biden Administration Monday announced a $5 billion program to accelerate the development of next-generation COVID-19 vaccines and treatments.

[Of course, the elephant in the room is: “Why? We already have effective treatments, ones that don’t kill people.” Oh, wait: they’re cheap, and Big Pharma can’t make more Billion$ from them. Carry on…..]

Like Operation Warp Speed, which developed and distributed vaccines in the early days of the pandemic, Project NextGen will cut across government agencies and involve public-private collaborations, a senior Biden official told USA TODAY.

Current vaccines, developed rapidly in the heat of the emergency, are “really good, but they’re not great,” said Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist who worked with the administration to develop the new program. “There is a substantial amount of work (to be done) to take these good vaccines and hopefully achieve better vaccines.”

Project NextGen has three primary goals, which Osterholm and colleagues laid out in a “roadmap” issued in February: Develop a nasal vaccine that will hopefully prevent infection as well as severe disease; develop longer-lasting vaccines; and create “broader” vaccines that protect against all variants and several different coronaviruses

[ Why do they need a “new” nasal vax when two already exist? Oh, wait. Same answer.]

It will also include funding to develop more durable monoclonal antibodies resistant to new variants, according to the administration. Antibodies were highly effective treatments earlier in the pandemic but have not been able to keep up with the virus as it evolved and are no longer available.

The Biden administration Monday announced a $5 billion program to accelerate the development of next-generation COVID-19 vaccines and treatments.

Like Operation Warp Speed, which developed and distributed vaccines in the early days of the pandemic, Project NextGen will cut across government agencies and involve public-private collaborations, a senior Biden official told USA TODAY.

Current vaccines, developed rapidly in the heat of the emergency, are “really good, but they’re not great,” said Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist who worked with the administration to develop the new program. “There is a substantial amount of work (to be done) to take these good vaccines and hopefully achieve better vaccines.”

Project NextGen has three primary goals, which Osterholm and colleagues laid out in a “roadmap” issued in February: Develop a nasal vaccine that will hopefully prevent infection as well as severe disease; develop longer-lasting vaccines; and create “broader” vaccines that protect against all variants and several different coronaviruses

It will also include funding to develop more durable monoclonal antibodies resistant to new variants, according to the administration. Antibodies were highly effective treatments earlier in the pandemic but have not been able to keep up with the virus as it evolved and are no longer available.

The administration said the initial allocation of $5 billion for Project NextGen would be financed through money saved from contracts costing less than originally estimated. The investment was first reported Monday by the Washington Post.

Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group who was also involved in the earlier roadmap, said he and others have been advising the White House since last summer to launch something like Project NextGen.

The funding is a start, he said, “but much more will be needed to accomplish all three goals,” he said. “The need though is urgent and now – something government generally doesn’t do well, hence the key will be prioritization and implementation.”

The Biden administration Monday announced a $5 billion program to accelerate the development of next-generation COVID-19 vaccines and treatments.

Like Operation Warp Speed, which developed and distributed vaccines in the early days of the pandemic, Project NextGen will cut across government agencies and involve public-private collaborations, a senior Biden official told USA TODAY.

Current vaccines, developed rapidly in the heat of the emergency, are “really good, but they’re not great,” said Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist who worked with the administration to develop the new program. “There is a substantial amount of work (to be done) to take these good vaccines and hopefully achieve better vaccines.”

Project NextGen has three primary goals, which Osterholm and colleagues laid out in a “roadmap” issued in February: Develop a nasal vaccine that will hopefully prevent infection as well as severe disease; develop longer-lasting vaccines; and create “broader” vaccines that protect against all variants and several different coronaviruses

It will also include funding to develop more durable monoclonal antibodies resistant to new variants, according to the administration. Antibodies were highly effective treatments earlier in the pandemic but have not been able to keep up with the virus as it evolved and are no longer available.

The administration said the initial allocation of $5 billion for Project NextGen will be financed through money saved from contracts costing less than originally estimated. The investment was first reported Monday by the Washington Post.

Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group who was also involved in the earlier roadmap, said he and others have been advising the White House since last summer to launch something like Project NextGen.

The funding is a start he said, “but much more will be needed to accomplish all three goals,” he said. “The need though is urgent and now – something government generally doesn’t do well, hence the key will be prioritization and implementation.”

Why do we need new coronavirus vaccines?

When the current vaccines were developed, speed was a priority along with safety and effectiveness. They were 95% effective at preventing all disease when first released in late 2020. But their effectiveness against mild disease, in particular, wanes over just a handful of months.

Protection may also not be as good as the virus continues to evolve. The current bivalent booster is aimed at both the original virus and the BA.5 variant.

But SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID, is the third new coronavirus to pop up in the last two decades, following Middle-Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory (SARS). If and when a fourth turns up, it would be great to already have a vaccine that could protect against” it,’ said Osterholm, who directs the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

[ “…when a fourth turns up, it would be great TO ALREADY HAVE a vaccine that could protect against it…”  Hmm, Bill Gates & friends have already told us there’s another pandemic coming, is there something they know that we don’t?]

A nasal vaccine is the third item on the wish list. The idea is that by delivering a vaccine directly to the area where the virus enters the body, scientists could set up a barrier of protection to prevent even mild infections and transmission from one person to the next.

[But didn’t they tell us initially that surface contact would spread it? DISINFECT EVERYTHING! And what about people who breathe more through their mouths — like people with allergies such as Hay Fever?]

“I think an initiative like this is much needed and should have been put in place much sooner,” said John Moore, an immunologist at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York.

What happens next?

Reaching these goals will likely be more difficult than it sounds, Moore said. 

“Anyone familiar with vaccine development knows that translation into a practical product is a much harder and more expensive process” than simply creating a basic vaccine, he said. “A lot of designs that look good in the early stages fizzle out because they cannot be manufactured efficiently under the conditions required for human trials.”

[And when did they have time for human testing under Warp Speed?]

Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician who directs the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, is skeptical that any of these goals are realistic.

Researchers have been trying for more than 40 years to develop vaccines against multiple strains of flu and against HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Both have proven elusive, he said, because the viruses mutate so much, as does SARS-CoV-2.

Meanwhile, nasal vaccines are still being tested in clinical trials, so it’s not yet clear how effective they’ll be against COVID. A nasal vaccine for the flu doesn’t provide any more protection than a shot, Offit said, and it’s most effective in young children who have never been exposed to the flu virus before. At this point, nearly every American has already been exposed to the virus that causes COVID.

Moore agrees that developing a nasal vaccine should be a high priority, but “it’s seriously naive to believe that it will be easy to make one.”

Offit worries that the emphasis on making COVID vaccines better will undermine public trust in the ones we already have. He said the current vaccines have been “amazing,” but that vaccines can only do so much.

What did Operation Warp Speed do?

Under the Trump administration, Operation Warp Speed spent about $30 billion beginning in March 2020 to develop, manufacture and distribute COVID-19 vaccines.

The federal government essentially placed bets on six different drug companies hoping at least a few of them would prove successful. Each received over $1 billion (although Pfizer/BioNTech developed its vaccine without government support) with a promise of a guaranteed market if they succeeded. 

►Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech both developed, tested, passed regulatory hurdles and produced millions of doses of their mRNA vaccines in under a year. Previously, the fastest vaccine had taken four years to bring to market.

►Johnson and Johnson also developed a vaccine based on a different technology. While effective, the vaccine led to a rare side effect and is no longer widely available in the United States.

►Novavax pursued a third type of vaccine technology and has also won emergency regulatory approval, though it is not widely available.

►The other two efforts, one by Sanofi and another by AstraZeneca, fell behind early and were not advanced beyond preliminary testing.

[It’s obvious I’m skeptical of the claims here. If the previous record for developing a vaccine was FOUR YEARS, how did they manage to develop –AND TEST– them so quickly (less than a third of that time)? Why weren’t these vaccines pulled after the deadly side effects became apparent? It only took a ‘mere’ 50 deaths to yank the swine flu vaccine; how many THOUSANDS have died/been seriously affected by the clot shots?]

Loading

94
Post Views: 236
Categories
Corruption COVID Medicine Reprints from others. Science

News from the Front Lines – Robert Malone MD-Switzerland stops the COVID vaccines & more

Winning. Switzerland stops the COVID vaccines.

Visits: 28

Robert W Malone MD, MS Inventor of mRNA & DNA vaccines, RNA as a drug. Scientist, physician, writer, podcaster, commentator, and advocate. Believer in our fundamental freedom of free speech.

Dr. Malone’s comments are in italics and enclosed in <brackets>

Switzerland stops the COVID vaccines, Spike protein kills brain cells, Twitter at war with Substack.

<Note: Switzerland, a non-aligned nation (not NATO, EU, or BRICS) is generally considered the global hub of the pharmaceutical industry. The Government of Switzerland coming out with this position is a clear recognition that objective scientific analysis of the risk/benefit ratio of COVID-19 “vaccines” does not justify “vaccination” in any cohort. Note that the Swiss position is that physicians can prescribe, but will need to carry the risk of liability in the case of adverse events – the exact opposite position of the US HHS position. This clearly demonstrates that this issue has become politicized in the USA, and that the objectivity of HHS decision-making has been compromised. This decision is based in part on the widespread natural immunity which has developed in Switzerland, something which was long denied by the US Government, US corporate media, and US information technology (social media) companies and their NGO surrogates.>

Machine translated from the original German

By Vanessa Renner Report24 April 07, 2023

Bang: Switzerland withdraws all Covid vaccination recommendations

Switzerland stops the Covid vaccinations: all vaccination recommendations have been withdrawn, doctors can only administer the controversial vaccines in individual cases under certain conditions – but then bear the risk of liability for vaccination damage. When will countries like Germany and Austria follow this example?

The Federal Office of Public Health (BAG) and the Federal Commission for Vaccination Issues (EKIF) stated in their vaccination recommendation (as of April 3rd, 2023) (to be found on this website):

In principle, the FOPH and EKIF will not formulate a recommendation for vaccination against Covid-19 in spring/summer 2023 due to the expected low virus circulation and the high level of immunity in the population.

Vaccination is only possible in individual cases – namely:

Vaccination is possible for people who are particularly at risk (BGP) ≥ 16 years of age if the attending physician considers it to be medically indicated in the respective epidemiological situation in the individual case, a temporarily increased protection against serious illness is to be expected and the last vaccination dose at least 6 months ago.

However, no vaccination recommendation for risk patients is explicitly given here.

In the following, it will be discussed that the effectiveness of vaccinations against current variants is reduced and short-lived – especially for people who are at risk. The adaptation of the mRNA vaccine could not keep up with the development of the variants. The recommendations of the BAG could change if there is a new wave of outbreaks, but even then, according to the document, vaccinations are no longer recommended for people under the age of 65.

No positive risk-benefit ratio

The remarks on “Adverse Vaccination Symptoms” (UIE) are also piquant:

According to the current state of knowledge, the risk of severe UIE with a recommended vaccination is much lower than the risk of a complication from Covid-19, against which the vaccination protects. The benefit of the vaccination administered according to the recommendation therefore outweighs the possible risks.

In the case of the valid non-recommendation, this essentially means that there is no longer a positive benefit-risk ratio for any Covid vaccination.

Liability: the federal government is out, doctors have a duty

The new recommendations also have consequences for liability. This is what the BAG document on the Covid vaccination strategy (as of November 29th, 2022) says:

Compensation by the federal government to injured persons for vaccination damage can only be considered for vaccinations if they were officially recommended or ordered (see Art. 64 EpG).

However, the federal government only stepped in if the damage was not covered by the vaccine manufacturer, the person vaccinating or an insurance company. The person vaccinating – i.e. generally the doctor – can be held liable if he has breached his duty of care. In this context, it is pointed out that the same rules regarding patient information apply to the Covid vaccination as to all other vaccinations.

The fact is, however, that very few doctors are likely to have informed their patients correctly about all the risks and side effects and the limited effectiveness of the Covid vaccinations. The off-label use of vaccines (not unusual for Covid vaccinations, for example, the bivalent mRNA vaccines in Switzerland are not approved as first vaccinations, not as a booster for people under the age of 18, and not as a fifth vaccination) must be discussed become. For doctors, the justification of vaccinations is becoming more difficult due to the changed recommendations, according to a BAG document on liability issues:

If the doctor treating you bases his/her choice or prescription on the vaccination recommendations of the BAG, he/she can prove that he/she has observed the recognized rules of medical and pharmaceutical sciences and has therefore complied with the duty of care under the law on medicinal products.

The “Weltwoche” reports that from now on the doctors have to be liable for the vaccination – which should probably decrease their willingness to vaccinate significantly.

<And then there is this article from the same Swiss source, Report 24. Those paying attention may recall that I was perhaps the first to raise the alarm that the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein is a toxin and that it interacts with the brain, a statement for which I was repeatedly attacked for spreading false information by a wide variety of media including various “fact-checker” organizations which (falsely) asserted that the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein used in the vaccines had been modified to make it non-toxic. Are those organizations now liable for the damage incurred when patients accepted the COVID-19 genetic vaccines which caused their bodies to make high levels of Spike protein due to their suppression of scientific information required for true informed consent?>

I guess Nancy Reagan was right after all. Drugs kill brain cells. Only different drugs than she was thinking of. Specifically, the drugs that the FDA and CDC call safe and effective “vaccines” which deliver SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein into your body. This is your brain on C-19 vaccines.

German study: Spike proteins from viruses and vaccines cause brain cells to die

The spike protein can be detected on patients’ immune cells for more than a year after infection

By Heinz Steiner

08 April 2023

A recently published German study indicates that the spike proteins from Covid-19 and the Covid vaccines cause brain cell death. Repeated vaccinations seem to be counterproductive in this respect. This can result in permanent brain damage.

How dangerous are the SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins really? In view of more and more critical study results, the question arises as to whether the ongoing injections with the gene syringes, which also contain these spike proteins, are not just incredibly dangerous. This is also shown by the BioRxIV pre-print study SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Accumulation in the Skull-MeningesBrain Axis: Potential Implications for Long-Term NeurologicalComplications in post-COVID-19, which examines the effects of these proteins on the brain. It says:

Our results showed accumulation of spike protein in the cranial medulla, meninges and brain parenchyma. Injection of the spike protein alone resulted in cell death in the brain, indicating a direct effect on brain tissue. We observed the presence of spike protein in the skulls of deceased individuals long after their COVID-19 infection, suggesting that spike protein persistence may contribute to long-term neurological symptoms.

Of all the SARS-CoV-2 virus proteins, only the spike protein was detected in the brain parenchyma. “This suggests that the spike protein might have a long lifespan in the body. This notion is supported by the observation that spike protein can be detected on patients’ immune cells for more than a year after infection – a recently published preprint suggests that spike protein can be detected in plasma samples up to 12 months after the diagnosis persists.” And further: “Injection of Spike protein induced a wide range of proteomic changes in the cranial cord, meninges, and brain, including proteins associated with coronavirus disease, the complement and coagulation cascades, neutrophilic degranulation, the formation of NETs and the PI3K-AKT signaling pathway, demonstrating the immunogenicity of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in the absence of other viral components.”

The researchers further report: “Our molecular analysis suggests an activation of the immune response in the craniocerebral axis, possibly through the recruitment and increase in activity of neutrophils, similar to what has been reported for the respiratory tract.” Furthermore, the viral proteins would act as an inflammatory stimulus, triggering a “significant immune response in the brain”. The study also states: “Proteins associated with neurodegeneration and damage to the blood-brain barrier were the most dysregulated molecules in the brain. The viral spike protein leads to the activation of RHOA, which triggers the disruption of the blood-brain barrier”.

That is why there are mini infarcts in the brain parenchyma and an increased number of microbleeds in Covid patients (vaccinated people, who are also contaminated with large amounts of spike proteins, were obviously not examined by the scientists). This work proves that the spike protein of the SARS-CoV2 and Covid-19 mRNA vaccine enters the skull marrow, meninges, and brain parenchyma. The spike protein also breaks through the blood-brain barrier. Spike protein alone causes cell death in the brain, activates complement and coagulation pathways leading to blood clots, mini-infarcts[heart attacks], and cerebral hemorrhage, and causes inflammation and local changes associated with neurodegeneration (dementia, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s).

We should be aware that the repeated administration of such spike proteins via the experimental gene syringes can be compared to multiple corona infections in terms of contamination of the human body with these spike proteins. But the more often such spike proteins are administered, the greater the potential health problems – in this case also in the human brain. We are talking about irreparable damage here, because the brain cells no longer regenerate.

Twitter at war with Substack: So much for the commitment to free speech.

 

Twitter restricts posts featuring Substack after it rolls out rival service

Washington Examiner

by Christopher Hutton, Technology Reporter

April 07, 2023 10:40 AM

Twitter is limiting any tweets that include links to Substack in an apparent response to the blogging platform’s launch of a competitor.

Users reported on Friday that any tweets with Substack links in them could not be liked, retweeted, or replied to.

The restrictions were imposed shortly after Substack, a platform for newsletters, announced Notes, its own Twitter competitor. Twitter also restricted the ability of users to embed tweets onto Substack the day before.

“We’re investigating reports that Twitter embeds and authentication no longer work on Substack,” Substack stated on Thursday after users reported that embedding tweets into Substack posts did not work. “We are actively trying to resolve this and will share updates as additional information becomes available.” The Washington Examiner tested the feature and found that direct Substack links were limited, while those with custom URLs were unaffected.

“We’re disappointed that Twitter has chosen to restrict writers’ ability to share their work. Writers deserve the freedom to share links to Substack or anywhere else,” Substack founders Chris Best, Hamish McKenzie, and Jairaj Sethi said in a statement sent to the Washington Examiner. “This abrupt change is a reminder of why writers deserve a model that puts them in charge, that rewards great work with money, and that protects the free press and free speech. Their livelihoods should not be tied to platforms where they don’t own their relationship with their audience, and where the rules can change on a whim.”

Loading

94
Post Views: 305
Categories
COVID Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science

An Ivermectin Success Story. Rapid recovery from severe symptoms

Wikimedia/Ivermectin-Aufgriffe des Zolls/CC BY 2.0

Visits: 27

Thanks to Christopher Cook (former executive editor of The Western Free Press) from The Freedom Scale.

If you’ve been paying attention—and if you’re reading this, then chances are you have been!—you know that ivermectin is effective against covid. You know that ivermectin has been maligned, lied about, and mocked by the mainstream narrative-creation machine. You know that orders came down from the top, and then spread down through the entire medical-pharmaceutical establishment, to make ivermectin nearly impossible to get. The government has even gone so far as to confiscate shipments that people have ordered from overseas.

You may have also read some of the many studies and data that demonstrate ivermectin’s effectiveness. You know about Uttar Pradesh and other states in India. You know about the lower severe-covid rates in Africa—where they eat ivermectin like candy because of the parasites there.

You also likely know that it is extremely safe, with few side effects; that it garnered a Nobel Prize; and that it has been administered several billion times worldwide since its advent.

That said, you may or may not have seen ivermectin work with your own eyes. Facts tell, but stories sell, and seeing it save someone is powerful stuff. So I am going to share one such story about which I have direct personal knowledge, and whose details I can confirm are 100% accurate.

First, some background…

For an as-yet-unknown reason, this patient appears to be more susceptible to severe covid symptoms. Patient had a strong reaction to Alpha in 2020 and severe symptoms, hospitalization, and multi-month recovery from Delta in the second half of 2021. (One hypothesis for this heightened susceptibility involves overactive immune response, but no dispositive determinations have been made.) Fever in 2021 was over 103˚ for 7 days; patient’s history thus gave strong reason for concern as soon as high fever began to manifest with this most recent infection.

And yet, read the details below and observe the rapid recovery as soon as ivermectin was administered:

Saturday:

Patient complained of upper respiratory symptoms culminating in high fever.

Sunday:

Fever reached 102.6 before administering fever-reducing medication (ibuprofen, acetaminophen). Fatigue, upper-respiratory symptoms strong. Covid test negative.

Monday:

Covid test in AM positive. Ivermectin administered mid-morning (0.6mg/kg). Fever reached 102.8 before administering fever-reducing medication. Fatigue, cough, fog, sputum production all severe. Heart rate elevated. Daytime SpO2 low-mid 90s. Covid test repeated to confirm; still positive. Fever-reducing medication taken before sleep (10PM).

Tuesday:

7 AM wakeup, no fever. Ivermectin administered (same dosage). Daytime SpO2 low-mid 90s. Took until 2pm for fever to slowly climb to 100.8. Fever-reducing medication administered. Fatigue, cough, fog, sputum production, heart rate all improved.

Wednesday:

7 AM wakeup, temperature normal. Ivermectin administered (same dosage). Temperature remained normal all day. Daytime SpO2 low-mid 90s. Fatigue, cough, fog, sputum production, heart rate all significantly improved.

Thursday:

Temperature normal. Ivermectin administered (same dosage).  All symptoms further improved. Entering pulmonary-inflammatory phase. Daytime SpO2 variable (91–95) Nighttime SpO2 average 91.

Friday:

Temperature normal.  Ivermectin administered (same dosage; final dose). All symptoms significantly improved. Daytime SpO2 variable (93–97) Nighttime SpO2 average 93.

Saturday:

Temperature normal. Covid test negative. All symptoms dramatically improved. Daytime SpO2 variable (94–97) Nighttime SpO2 average 94 (which is low-average for patient).

Sunday:

Temperature normal. Covid test negative result confirmed. All symptoms continue to improve. Daytime SpO2 is between low-normal and normal.

Subsequent days:

SpO2 normal. Minor cough and fatigue linger but improve, and no indication of increase in inflammatory risk.

Notes:

This began as a stronger-than-expected reaction to the current strain, based on reports of mild symptoms for most others. Fever ~103 for two days, with no indication of any pending improvement. Given patient’s previous history, there was strong concern and expectation of severe symptoms and continued high fever. After ivermectin administered, fever went from ~103 to ~101 to normal in under 48 hours, and remained normal thereafter. Symptoms showed significant improvement each day.

Vitamins and other supports were administered, but ivermectin was the main player.

There is always the risk of confusing correlation with causation, and obviously this is a single case study and not a broad scientific study. But given the fact that close to 100 studies have been done…and given the patient’s rapid recovery in spite of apparent susceptibility to severe covid reaction, this does appear to be one more data point in ivermectin’s favor.

Given all we know about ivermectin’s effectiveness, we can rightly say that its vilification, and especially its removal as a medical option for millions of people in America and elsewhere, constitute literal

1

crimes against humanity.

I wonder if anyone will ever be held to account.

 

Loading

145
Post Views: 272
Categories
Economy Just my own thoughts Life Links from other news sources. Science

Why Progressives way of doing Green Energy makes no sense.

Past climate much hotter. NOAA-Climate.gov.

Visits: 13

Why Progressives way of doing Green Energy makes no sense. China uses coal to puts more toxic gasses in the atmosphere than the US and all the European nations combined. So what does the US and European nations do? Buys Solar Panels from China.

China doesn’t only benefit from not having to pay so-called climate reparations. But they benefit from the entire UN Green New Deal [and] net-zero agenda because the world is going to be looking to China. The U.S. buys over 80 percent of our solar panels currently from China. We rely on China for all the rare earth mining for lithium and cobalt. China is expanding mining operations in Africa — places like the Congo with allegations of underage labor of children of 8, 9 years old by international human rights groups.

Loading

126
Post Views: 243
Categories
COVID Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science Uncategorized

Tony the Fauch Video Deposition Released Publicly

Catching the Fauch in a lie. Newsmax Photo.

Visits: 57

Does my heart good to see the Fauch lies exposed so all can see. Thanks Newsmax for this great article.

https://youtu.be/soMUg_y3sqw

 

Fauci Emails and Covid Lab Leak Theory

By Nick Koutsobinas    

 

The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) has released six video depositions taken in a federal lawsuit that sheds light on what role government actors, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, played in censoring or, as revealed in the Twitter Files, the offshoring of government requests to private social media companies or foreign actors to censor speech around COVID-19.

In his deposition for State of Missouri v. Joseph R. Biden Jr., as NCLA outlines, Fauci “testified ‘I do not recall’ 174 times, and ‘I don’t remember,’ at least 212 times.” According to NCLA, evidence from “his own emails and past statements” indicate the former head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) “cast substantial doubt” on his claim to a “failing memory.”

According to U.S. Right to Know, Fauci requested Wellcome Trust Director Jeremy Farrar organize a secret teleconference on Feb. 1, 2020, onstensibly to shift concerns from a lab leak to one of natural origin.

Furthermore, NCLA says, “his deposition testimony — that he genuinely believed COVID had natural origins — conflicts with emails he exchanged with scientists in early 2020, indicating that he believed the lab leak hypothesis could be accurate.”

The recent ruling by Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana denying the government defendants’ motion to dismiss has paved the way for the case to continue. The judge was unpersuaded by the defendants’ arguments.

Elvis Chan, who has been named in the Twitter Files, said in his deposition that the FBI played a prominent role in working with Big Tech to sway public opinion. In regard to the wider scope of what’s been termed the “censorship industrial complex,” Chan, on the eve of the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story, sent Twitter’s then-head of site integrity, Yoel Roth, 10 documents. “Within hours,” journalist Michael Shellenberger writes, “Twitter and other social media companies” began censoring the story.

Nonetheless, the recently filed Supplemental Preliminary Injunction Brief as well as the Proposed Findings of Fact reveal a damning effort by the Biden administration and federal officials’ in employing “illicit tactics” to silence voices on social media that presented views on COVID-19 that were otherwise deemed inconvenient or disfavored.

Jenin Younes, litigation counsel for NCLA, said, “These depositions further confirm what other discovery in the case has already demonstrated: Dozens of members of the federal government, including unelected bureaucrats like Dr. Fauci, orchestrated a campaign to shut down debate about COVID-19 related subjects; and they deceived the American public on issues ranging from the lab leak theory to efficacy of masks to the protection offered by naturally acquired immunity to whether the vaccines could prevent disease transmission.”

The six video depositions from NCLA are included here: “Chan, FBI supervisory special agent; Carol Crawford, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention chief of the digital media branch; Fauci, NIAID director and White House chief medical adviser; Daniel Kimmage, acting coordinator of the State Department’s Global Engagement Center; Brian Scully, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency; and Eric Waldo, senior adviser to the surgeon general of the United States.”

Newsmax reached out for comment to the defendants named in the case, including the Department of Justice and the National Institutes of Health.

Loading

120
Post Views: 250
Categories
Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science

An actual scientist. Biologist Defends JK Rowling: ‘Only Two Sexes’

Left denying science. Twitter link.

Visits: 27

An actual scientist. Biologist Defends JK Rowling: ‘Only Two Sexes’

The Left Celebrates Biological Men for Women’s History Month

Richard Dawkins, a prominent British evolutionary biologist, defended author J.K. Rowling on Monday amid backlash for her feminist critique of the transgender movement.

Joining “Piers Morgan Uncensored” on TalkTV, Dawkins accused leftists of bullying Rowling, who created Harry Potter, and lesbian philosopher Kathleen Stock for speaking out about gender.

“It’s bullying,” Dawkins said. “We’ve seen the way J.K. Rowling has been bullied, Kathleen Stock has been bullied. They’ve stood up to it, but it’s very upsetting the way this tiny minority of people has managed to capture the discourse to talk errant nonsense.”

Dawkins, a notable atheist activist, also said he was uninterested in talks about an undetermined number of genders.

“As a biologist, there are two sexes, and that’s all there is to it,” he said, while acknowledging that a debate can still be had about sex and gender being different concepts.

Dawkins later commented on the state of Western universities and colleges, saying that “they have bought into the idea that if you don’t like what you think you’re going to hear from someone, you should shut them up.”

“They want to feel safe, and university is the one place you should not feel safe,” Dawkins said. “You want to be physically safe, but intellectually, you should be challenged.”

Dawkins’ comments came amid ongoing public backlash to Rowling, Stock, and other similar feminists who have been skeptical of the LGBTQ movement’s intrusion into women’s spaces.

“If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives,” Rowling tweeted in 2020. “It isn’t hate to speak the truth.”

Loading

215
Post Views: 342
Categories
Crime Reprints from others. Science

Humans are still better at creating phishing emails than AI — for now

Visits: 8

AI-generated phishing emails, including ones created by ChatGPT, present a potential new threat for security professionals, says Hoxhunt.
by Lance Whitney in Security for Tech Republic 
on

Amid all of the buzz around ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence apps, cybercriminals have already started using AI to generate phishing emails. For now, human cybercriminals are still more accomplished at devising successful phishing attacks, but the gap is closing, according to security trainer Hoxhunt’s new report released Wednesday.

Phishing campaigns created by ChatGPT vs. humans

Hoxhunt compared phishing campaigns generated by ChatGPT versus those created by human beings to determine which stood a better chance of hoodwinking an unsuspecting victim.

To conduct this experiment, the company sent 53,127 users across 100 countries phishing simulations designed either by human social engineers or by ChatGPT. The users received the phishing simulation in their inboxes as they’d receive any type of email. The test was set up to trigger three possible responses:

  1. Success: The user successfully reports the phishing simulation as malicious via the Hoxhunt threat reporting button.
  2. Miss: The user doesn’t interact with the phishing simulation.
  3. Failure: The user takes the bait and clicks on the malicious link in the email.

The results of the phishing simulation led by Hoxhunt

In the end, human-generated phishing mails caught more victims than did those created by ChatGPT. Specifically, the rate in which users fell for the human-generated messages was 4.2%, while the rate for the AI-generated ones was 2.9%. That means the human social engineers outperformed ChatGPT by around 69%.

One positive outcome from the study is that security training can prove effective at thwarting phishing attacks. Users with a greater awareness of security were far more likely to resist the temptation of engaging with phishing emails, whether they were generated by humans or by AI. The percentages of people who clicked on a malicious link in a message dropped from more than 14% among less-trained users to between 2% and 4% among those with greater training.

The results also varied by country:

  • U.S.: 5.9% of surveyed users were fooled by human-generated emails, while 4.5% were fooled by AI-generated messages.
  • Germany: 2.3% were tricked by humans, while 1.9% were tricked by AI.
  • Sweden: 6.1% were deceived by humans, with 4.1% deceived by AI.

Current cybersecurity defenses can still cover AI phishing attacks

Though phishing emails created by humans were more convincing than those from AI, this outcome is fluid, especially as ChatGPT and other AI models improve. The test itself was performed before the release of ChatGPT 4, which promises to be savvier than its predecessor. AI tools will certainly evolve and pose a greater threat to organizations from cybercriminals who use them for their own malicious purposes.

On the plus side, protecting your organization from phishing emails and other threats requires the same defenses and coordination whether the attacks are created by humans or by AI.

“ChatGPT allows criminals to launch perfectly worded phishing campaigns at scale, and while that removes a key indicator of a phishing attack — bad grammar — other indicators are readily observable to the trained eye,” said Hoxhunt CEO and co-founder Mika Aalto. “Within your holistic cybersecurity strategy, be sure to focus on your people and their email behavior because that is what our adversaries are doing with their new AI tools.

“Embed security as a shared responsibility throughout the organization with ongoing training that enables users to spot suspicious messages and rewards them for reporting threats until human threat detection becomes a habit.”

Security tips or IT and users

Toward that end, Aalto offers the following tips.

For IT and security

  • Require two-factor authentication or multi-factor authentication for all employees who access sensitive data.
  • Give all employees the skills and confidence to report a suspicious email; such a process should be seamless.
  • Provide security teams with the resources needed to analyze and address threat reports from employees.

For users

  • Hover over any link in an email before clicking on it. If the link appears out of place or irrelevant to the message, report the email as suspicious to IT support or help desk team.
  • Scrutinize the sender field to make sure the email address contains a legitimate business domain. If the address points to Gmail, Hotmail or other free service, the message is likely a phishing email.
  • Confirm a suspicious email with the sender before acting on it. Use a method other than email to contact the sender about the message.
  • Think before you click. Socially engineered phishing attacks try to create a false sense of urgency, prompting the recipient to click on a link or engage with the message as quickly as possible.
  • Pay attention to the tone and voice of an email. For now, phishing emails generated by AI are written in a formal and stilted manner.

Loading

100
Post Views: 157
Verified by MonsterInsights