.post-body img { max-width:400px; max-height:auto; }

Thursday, September 30, 2021

New Evidence of FBI Involvement in the 1/6 Protest -- With Darren Beattie, Who Broke the Story



Original Rumble video: https://rumble.com/vn50ax-new-evidence-of-fbi-involvement-in-the-16-protest-with-darren-beattie-who-b.html When former Trump speechwriter Darren Beattie reported in June that there was evidence suggesting FBI foreknowledge of the January 6 protest at the Capitol, if not activ

ORIGINAL LINK

Wednesday, September 29, 2021

Unvaxed at Risk from Vaxed in Coming Dark Winter

ORIGINAL LINK

Submitted by mark

Via USA Watchdog

Karen Kingston is a medical analyst that researches a wide variety of things in the medical world.  She’s an expert in getting new drugs and medical devices approved and pass regulatory hurdles.  She researched the drug patents for the CV19 vaccine and says the unvaxed are at serious medical risk form the vaxed.  Kingston explains, “If you take a look at the biological license approval for Pfizer, it specifically explains that Comirnaty is a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA.

What is that?  That is a man-made genetic material that coats the spike protein of SARS COV 2. So, people who are injected are producing trillions of the disease causing spike protein, and they can infect other people.  This was documented in the August 2015 document by the FDA called ‘Viral Based Gene Therapies’ and shedding analysis and design studies.  This is what’s called a viral gene based therapy, and it’s very well documented by the FDA. . . . That is clear evidence that they knew the shedding would occur.”

This is so insidious that the FDA is well aware of unvaxed pregnant women.  Kingston says, “Not only can you get sick, but if you get pregnant and are around someone who is vaccinated, that could result in the death of your baby, your baby dying within one month of being born, birth defects and autoimmune disease over its lifetime.  That is horrifying.”

Kingston says there are also cases of vaxed parents infecting their unvaxed children.  Kingston says, “If you look at the weekly morbidity and mortality reports from the CDC in August, they showed . . . that there was a major spike in cases of hospitalization in children between 1 and 4 years old, then 5 and 12, and 12 to 18 beginning in January and going up very quickly.  Well, the children were not supposed to be vaccinated.  That’s correct–the parents are.  As parents get more and more vaccinated, the children, particularly 1 to 4 year olds, are the highest spike in hospitalizations due to Covid.  Children never got Covid before.  What they are getting is Covid from their parents being vaccinated.”

Kingston gives ways to minimize the risk for the unvaccinated and also some help for the vaccinated with a supplement called NAC.

Kingston says the world needs to wake up to the extreme and contends, “This is absolutely unlawful, and I just can’t believe parents, police officers, healthcare providers and our government are just standing by and basically letting a conspiracy to commit aggravated assault and murder on our children and employees.  I am tired of people saying this is conspiracy theory, it’s unproven.  It’s not.  All these documents are available on the FDA, NIH and USPTO.gov.”

One thing is for sure, more and more vaxed people and some unvaxed people are going to get sick, and many will also die from the vaccines forced on the world.  Can it be avoided?  Kingston says, “I think there is a way to avoid this to get the truth out there and to start treating people.  Otherwise, yes, let’s heed the words of Dr. Fauci, this time and this time only, which is that we are in for a dark winter.”

(What is written here is only a small portion of what is covered. There is much more in the 58 minute interview.)

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with pharmaceutical and medical device analyst Karen Kingston.  (9.30.21)

After the Interview:

Karen Kingston is in the process of starting a website so people can get and give information about the Vax, CV19 and anything related to it.  I’ll let you know when it’s up and running.

If you want to follow Karen Kingston, you can do so on LinkedIn.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Safety Signals for COVID Vaccines Are Loud and Clear. Why Is Nobody Listening?

ORIGINAL LINK

Summary:

  • There is a disproportionately large number of adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from COVID-19 vaccines compared with other vaccines.
  • There are 91x the number of deaths and 276x the number of coagulopathy events reported after COVID-19 vaccination than after flu vaccination.
  • Safety signals were found for 242 adverse events using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) methodology.
  • Full transparency of CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety monitoring is urgently needed.

On Aug. 30, the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted to recommend Pfizer/BioNTech’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for people 16 years and older.

In comments I submitted to the committee along with my collaborators, we provided evidence of large safety signals from VAERS, using published CDC methods to analyze the data.

In this article, I describe the safety signals highlighted in our comments, which raise pressing questions about the CDC’s and FDA’s COVID vaccine safety monitoring efforts.

To begin with, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of adverse event reports to VAERS associated with COVID-19 vaccines. The chart below shows the number of deaths for all other vaccines reported to VAERS annually since the system’s inception in 1990, compared to deaths reported for COVID-19 vaccines, from both domestic and foreign sources.

Figure 1. Number of Deaths Reported to VAERS Since 1990

As of early September, there have been 14,506 deaths reported to VAERS for COVID-19 vaccines, compared to 8,673 for the preceding 30 years for all other vaccines. That is already more than 50 times the annual average — and we still have four months left to go until the end of the year.

It is hard to imagine how anyone can look at these numbers and not be at least a little bit concerned. Yet many people are dismissive, saying the unprecedented number of reports is due to the unprecedented number of vaccinations being administered.

I crunched the numbers, and even after taking into account the total number of vaccinations, the number of reports for COVID vaccines still towers over previous years.

See, for example, Figure 2 below, which shows the number of deaths reported per million vaccine doses from 2010-2020 and for COVID-19 vaccines. That’s nearly 40 deaths reported per million COVID vaccines versus an average of 1.6 for all other vaccines from the previous 10 years.

No matter what I did to the data, or what types of adverse events I looked at, I could not make the big jump in COVID vaccine reports go away.

Deaths Reported to VAERS per Million Vaccine Doses Since 2010Figure 2. Deaths Reported to VAERS per Million Vaccine Doses Since 2010

So why do the CDC and FDA not seem to be concerned about this? I don’t know, but to try to answer that question, we have to take a step back to talk about VAERS and how the CDC uses it to detect safety signals.

VAERS, which is jointly administered by the CDC and FDA, is typical of all reporting systems used to monitor the safety of medicinal products. Although widely used, there are many known limitations with this type of system. Probably the biggest is that it is passive or spontaneous, meaning it relies on the willingness of people and medical professionals to “spontaneously” submit reports. So reporting rates are low and inconsistent.

READ + SHARE my letter to Dr. Kessler, newly named co-chair of Biden’s #COVID-19 Advisory Committee, requesting he immediately fix Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (#VAERS), system that monitors adverse outcomes following vaccination. #TheDefenderhttps://t.co/Jw77i8NrOA

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) December 19, 2020

Another limitation is that reports cannot be used reliably to show a causal connection between a vaccine or medication and an adverse event. So what are they good for?

They are used to provide a kind of early warning system. When enough reports accumulate about a particular type of event, those reports produce a safety signal, like an alarm bell. When the alarm rings, it doesn’t mean there is definitely a problem, but it is supposed to alert authorities to a possible problem and prompt further investigation.

In late January, the CDC released a briefing document outlining the agency’s standard operating procedures for ongoing monitoring of VAERS for safety signals from COVID-19 vaccines.

The document lays out plans to produce weekly reports that would highlight any safety signals found across a range of different adverse events. Although those reports have not been made public, we don’t need to rely on the CDC, as VAERS data is publicly available.

Subscribe to The Defender - It’s Free!

  • Name*
    First Last
  • Email*
  • Hidden
    Date
    MM slash DD slash YYYY
  • Hidden
    Source
  • Comments
    This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

To detect safety signals with new vaccines, I took my lead from a study published by CDC researchers who were trying to detect safety signals for the new H1N1 swine flu vaccines introduced in 2009. The researchers compared VAERS reports for H1N1 vaccines to reports for regular flu vaccines.

So I took a similar approach and compared adverse events reported for COVID-19 to events reported for flu vaccines. This comparison makes a lot of sense, as flu vaccines are the only other type of vaccine administered to adults and the elderly in large numbers.

Of course, because the number of flu and COVID-19 vaccines administered is not the same, it makes sense to look at the number of reports per dose administered, something not specified in the CDC briefing document.

Table 1 (below) shows a comparison of VAERS reports for COVID-19 vaccines versus flu vaccines per million doses administered for a range of different event types and age groups.

COVID-to-Flu Ratio Reporting Ratios per Million Vaccine DosesTable 1. COVID-to-Flu Ratio Reporting Ratios per Million Vaccine Doses

For each adverse event type, the table shows the COVID-to-Flu ratio, which simply shows how many more events were reported per million doses of COVID-19 vaccines compared to the number per million doses of seasonal influenza vaccines.

The comparison is based on all reports to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccines (from Dec. 15 – Aug. 6) to all reports for all seasonal influenza vaccines from the previous five influenza seasons (from 2015/16 to 2019/20).

Keep in mind that for all the analyses, I excluded all reports that came from people with an indication of a SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as a positive test result or even a suspicion of COVID-19 — so the adverse events can’t be blamed on that.

The first thing to notice is that for every type of adverse event for every age group, there were more reports per million doses of COVID-19 vaccines than for flu vaccines. If you look at the bottom row for all age groups (12 and older), you see that for every million vaccine doses administered, there were 19 times more reports to VAERS for COVID-19 vaccines than for flu vaccines, 28 times more serious events, 91 times more deaths, 3 times more reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), 276 times more reports of coagulopathy; 126 times as many reports of myocardial infarction; and 136 times more reports of myopericarditis.

Also notable is the variation across age groups. For example, death and coagulopathy were more preponderant for older age groups, whereas GBS and myopericarditis were more frequent for younger age groups.

The ratios for myopericarditis put the full significance of these results into perspective, since it is an officially recognized side effect of COVID-19 vaccines, especially among men under age 50. (We used the reporting rates per million vaccine doses from that report, slide 30, to calculate the COVID-to-Flu ratios for myopericarditis, which were slightly smaller than our own calculations.) See for example this FDA press release and the below slide from an Aug. 30 CDC presentation to the ACIP:

Slide from Aug. 30 CDC presentation to the Advisory Committee on Immunization PracticesSlide from Aug. 30 CDC presentation to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices

While the COVID-to-flu ratio for myopericarditis among 12- to 17-year-olds in Table 1 is in a league of its own at 1251-to-1, the ratio for the 18- to 49-year-olds is 81-to-1, which is well within the range of many of the other ratios in the table — and even smaller than many of them.

Because the CDC has acknowledged that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis in this age group, a reporting ratio of at least 81 is like an alarm bell going off to warn us of a potential safety problem. And the much larger ratios for coagulopathy and myocardial infarctions are like a 4-alarm fire.

So why does the CDC seem to be unconcerned about these safety signals? Is it possible they haven’t picked up on them?

Admittedly, comparing reports for COVID versus flu after taking the number of doses into account is not the same exact methodology anticipated in the CDC’s briefing document. Although it is arguably superior for a variety of reasons I won’t get into here, just to be sure I went ahead and did the exact same type of analysis outlined in the briefing document and found unambiguous safety signals.

Before showing the results, I need to explain how it works, but to do that we’ll have to get a bit deep in the weeds.

The method is a well-established pharmacovigilance technique based on calculating what’s known as the “Proportional Reporting Ratio” or PRR. To calculate the PRR, you first have to calculate the proportion of each type of event out of all events reported for that vaccine (COVID-19 and flu).

So for example, we take the number of VAERS reports of myocarditis for COVID-19 vaccines and divide that by the total number of all events reported for COVID-19 vaccines. Then we do the same for flu vaccines.

Then, to get the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), we divide the proportion of reports for a given type of event (like myopericarditis) for COVID-19 vaccines by the proportion for flu vaccines.

If the proportion for COVID-19 vaccines is large relative to the proportion for flu vaccines, that sends a signal alerting us to a potential safety problem. A safety signal is defined as a PRR that is greater than 2, statistically significant (with what’s known as a Chi-square value above 4) and has at least three of that type of event reported for each vaccine.

Table 2 below shows the PRR’s I calculated for several different adverse events across different age groups. All of the PRR’s in bold fit the CDC’s definition of a safety signal. This includes all PRR’s for death, except for the youngest age group, all PRR’s for coagulopathy and myopericarditis, and all PRR’s for myocardial infarction, except for the youngest age group because there were no myocardial infarctions reported for influenza vaccines.

COVID-19 vs. Flu Vaccines: Proportional Reporting Ratios.Table 2. COVID-19 vs. Flu Vaccines: Proportional Reporting Ratios (PRR’s)

Note that, by default, the PRR method will never detect a safety signal for events that have never been reported for the comparator vaccine — like the zero teenage myocardial infarctions reported for flu vaccines ever compared to 10 for COVID-19 vaccines — which arguably should be seen as an even stronger indication that something is amiss.)

The only event that makes up a larger proportion of flu vaccine reports than COVID-19 vaccines is GBS.

Here, too, the PRRs for myopericarditis are instructive. Even though the PRR value for myopericarditis in the youngest age group is off the scale, the values for the 18 to 49 age group is similar to or even lower than the PRR’s for deaths, myocardial infarctions and coagulopathy.

Because the signal for myopericarditis is indicative of an actual, acknowledged safety problem, other signals of similar size might very well be alerting us to actual but unacknowledged problems.

I then went a step further and calculated PRRs for all adverse events submitted to VAERS. I found 242 adverse events that satisfied the definition of a safety signal according to the CDC.

Some of them were minor, like abnormal dreams or vaccination site discomfort. But many of them were very serious and included, in addition to the events shown in Table 2: cardiac arrests; cerebral hemorrhages; cerebrovascular accidents (strokes); renal failure; and vaginal hemorrhages — and that’s just the tip of the iceberg of serious events that show unambiguous safety signals.

Subscribe to The Defender - It’s Free!

  • Name*
    First Last
  • Email*
  • Hidden
    Date
    MM slash DD slash YYYY
  • Hidden
    Source
  • Phone
    This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

An additional 87 types of events didn’t qualify as a safety signal just because they had been reported only once or twice for flu vaccines. An additional 6,159 types of events had never been reported for flu vaccines, despite more than 600 million flu vaccines administered among the age groups I examined.

For these events, it could be argued the safety signal is infinite, since the number of events in the denominator is zero. But instead of raising an alarm, they are by definition considered unworthy of concern.

No matter how I sliced and diced the data, the safety signal for COVID-19 vaccines rang loud and clear. It’s hard to imagine how anyone could miss it. It would be like taking a hike in Arizona and falling into the Grand Canyon because you didn’t see the big hole in the ground.

Some people are dismissive when presented with this evidence. “VAERS data can’t be trusted,” they say. “Anyone can submit a report and some of the reports are fraudulent.”

Yes, anybody can submit a report, and some might be fraudulent. But the CDC hasn’t raised any concerns about this and continues to use VAERS to monitor for safety signals.

A recent study found 67% of VAERS reports were submitted by healthcare workers, and the CDC confirmed that 88% of VAERS myopericarditis reports they examined fit their case definition.

Yes, VAERS is imperfect, but the large majority of reports are legitimate and reliable.

Another objection is that the increase in reporting is artificial. Many people are scared of these new vaccines. Awareness of VAERS is higher than it has ever been. And the government has actively encouraged, and in some cases required, people to report adverse events — so of course VAERS reports are going to increase.

But that doesn’t mean there are really more events. This phenomenon is known as “stimulated reporting.”

Nobody at any of the recent CDC advisory committee meetings raised any concern that VAERS reports were inflated. If the unprecedented increase in VAERS reports was just due to stimulated reporting, CDC researchers tell us we should expect to see COVID-to-flu ratios and PRRs that are roughly similar across different types of events. So if there was a 20-fold increase in reporting of serious events, say, then there should be a similar increase in other types of events.

A brief glance at Tables 1 and 2 clearly shows this is not the case — the reporting rates vary greatly across different types of events, and also across different age groups for the same event.

This is a huge giveaway that the increase — or at least a large portion of it — is not due to stimulated reporting. Indeed, underreporting is usually a bigger concern with data like VAERS, and there are good reasons to think the true number of adverse events is much larger.

But if the safety signal from VAERS is loud and clear and VAERS reports can be trusted, then how is the CDC not picking up on this? Or are they ignoring it? It’s hard to say.

It might have to do with how the CDC handles signals once they are detected. The agency’s protocols call for a thorough clinical review of events that trigger a safety signal in order to determine if the event could plausibly be caused by the vaccine. If that’s the case, it’s conceivable they found safety signals, but then determined that there was no plausible connection and therefore no cause for concern.

What this means in practice, however, is that if the CDC investigators do not understand how these novel vaccines — which use gene therapy technology and have had only limited use in humans — might cause a particular type of adverse event, the presumption is that there is no plausible connection.

For example, the CDC has declared after reviewing over 7,000 reports of deaths reported in the U.S. as of Sept. 7, they were not able to determine a plausible causal relationship for any of them, except for three due to thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) from the Janssen vaccine.

But the methods and criteria they use to make these determinations aren’t published anywhere, assuming they even exist. It would be easier to take their word for it if their decision-making process wasn’t hidden behind a veil of secrecy.

And maybe that’s the biggest problem of all: lack of transparency. VAERS reports are public, which is laudable, but what the CDC does with those reports is mostly hidden from view.

For example, the CDC briefing document outlining plans to monitor VAERS speaks of producing some dozen or more tables every week detailing the agency’s search for safety signals. To my knowledge, none of these have ever been made public.

And keep in mind that VAERS isn’t the only data source the CDC uses for safety monitoring. The other main source is the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), which should be  more reliable than VAERS because it uses patient medical records from some of the nation’s largest HMO’s.

There are several ongoing COVID-19 vaccine monitoring initiatives that use the VSD, including “COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Evaluation in Pregnant Women and their Infants,” “Mortality and Vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccines,” “COVID-19 Vaccine Safety, Spontaneous Abortion (SAB) and Stillbirth,” and “COVID-19 Vaccine-Mediated Enhanced Disease (VMED) and Vaccine Effectiveness.”

While these monitoring efforts are certainly praiseworthy, of the five that should have already started yielding initial results and interim reports, only partial results from two of them have been presented to the CDC advisory committee or made public in any way.

Where are the others? And how could forcing workers to get vaccinated ever be justified when so much of the evidence regarding their safety is still missing?

A complete and transparent accounting of the CDC’s safety monitoring is urgently needed, including internal communications and the results of all interim reports and analyses, whether through an Freedom of Information Act request, Congressional order or some other means.

The public deserves to know how the CDC reached the conclusion there was no plausible connection between the COVID-19 vaccines and the thousands of deaths they’ve reviewed, and also why they have failed to detect safety signals — or if they have, why they are being ignored.

Postscript: Since completing this article, I and others submitted comments to the meeting of FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) on Sept. 17, which voted 16 to 2 to not approve a booster dose for people under 65 years old, citing a lack of sufficient safety and efficacy data. However the FDA overruled its advisory committee, as did the CDC after its vaccine safety committee recommended against authorizing a third Pfizer dose for anyone other than people 65 and older, long-term care facility residents and certain people with underlying conditions.

The post Safety Signals for COVID Vaccines Are Loud and Clear. Why Is Nobody Listening? appeared first on Children's Health Defense.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

The ‘other’ deficit is near an all-time high



It’s only Wednesday, and yet it’s already been a terrible weak for America’s record-setting deficit. And no, I’m not talking about the country’s record-high fiscal deficits, which include the eye-popping $50+ trillion Social Security shortfall, and the $28.5 trillion national debt.

ORIGINAL LINK

Do not let Rachel Maddow or anyone else rewrite history



This is what Big Sister was telling you exactly six months ago today: “The virus stops with every vaccinated person… A vaccinated person gets ex…

ORIGINAL LINK

YouTube says will ban posts from prominent anti-vaccine activists in effort to purge misinformation



YouTube said Wednesday the platform is banning several prominent anti-vaccine activists from its platform as part of an effort to remove all content that falsely claims that approved vaccines are dangerous. Amon the accounts being banned are those of Joseph Mercola and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

ORIGINAL LINK

The (diabolically) brilliant politics of scaring the elderly



First: Thanks so much for all the feedback. You blew up my inbox (more correctly, I blew it up)! Two interesting points: The vast majority of you wrote that you are happy to receive several emails a day.

ORIGINAL LINK

Scandinavian Governments Announce “COVID Is Over,” Israel Announces the Vaccine Doesn’t Protect



All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

ORIGINAL LINK

An NBA Star and New York's Governor Show That Liberal COVID Discourse is Devoid of Science



It is virtually a religious belief in the dominant liberal culture that people who do not want the COVID vaccine are stupid, ignorant, immoral and dangerous.

ORIGINAL LINK

Tuesday, September 28, 2021

Fed up NBA Players Cleverly Turn Tables on Media When Asked Their Opinions on Getting Vaccinated



Like every other public figure in America, NBA players are being questioned by the mainstream media as to their personal opinions on whether or not to get the coronavirus vaccine.

ORIGINAL LINK

Monday, September 27, 2021

Harvard Business School Moves Classes Online As COVID Cases Spike Among 95% Vaccinated Student Population

ORIGINAL LINK

Harvard Business School is moving all all first-year and some second-year MBA students to online classes after learning that breakthrough cases are spiking amongst students and staff, despite stringent mask rules, frequent invasive testing, and one of the highest vaccination rates in the country.

“In recent days, we’ve seen a steady rise in breakthrough infections among our student population, despite high vaccination rates and frequent testing,” HBS spokesperson Mark Cautela told Poets&Quants. “Contact tracers who have worked with positive cases highlight that transmission is not occurring in classrooms or other academic settings on campus.”

“During this time, we have also asked all students to eliminate unmasked indoor activities, limit in-person interactions with others outside their household, move all group gatherings online, and cancel group travel,” Cautela begged. “We have increased the frequency of testing to three times a week and we are also preparing a new daily email to all students to keep them fully apprised of all aspects of the situation.”

Harvard University states on its website that 95% of students and 96% of employees are vaccinated, and notes that “COVID-19 testing requirements remain in place for every member of the community who is authorized to be on campus this fall, including those who come to campus infrequently. The Dashboard data is relative to individuals, living both on and off campus, authorized to participate in Harvard’s COVID-19 screening.”

Data from Israel reportedly showed earlier this month that “’fully vaccinated’” people are 27 times more likely to be infected and develop COVID-19 symptoms than unvaccinated people with natural immunity,” and “‘fully vaccinated’ people are 8 times more likely to be hospitalized from a ‘breakthrough’ infection.”



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Biden Gets Booster Shot, Says 97% Of Americans Need To Be Vaxx'd To Return To Normal

ORIGINAL LINK
Biden Gets Booster Shot, Says 97% Of Americans Need To Be Vaxx'd To Return To Normal

Just like he did when he received his first jab last year (before he was president), President Joe Biden, 78, posed for the cameras on Monday as he received his first booster jab while cameras clicked and flashed, and he delivered some brief remarks to the public.

The FDA granted an emergency use authorization last week for booster doses of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine six months after the completion of the two-dose course for those 65 and older, those with some underlying conditions and those who work in high-risk environments. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also recommended a booster shot for these groups of people.

Video of Biden's third inoculation circulated widely on Twitter Monday. Before he received the jab, Biden delivered a brief statement, claiming the White House is preparing for a possible government shutdown as leaders struggle to pass a budget by the end of this month.

Speaking on Monday, Biden emphasized that even though booster shots are important, getting fully vaccinated with the two-dose regimen is even more so.

"Let me clear. Boosters are important. But the most important thing we need to do is get more people vaccinated," the president said before getting his jab. "The vast majority of Americans are doing the right thing. Over 77% of adults have gotten at least one shot. About 23% haven't gotten any shots, and that distinct minority is causing an awful lot of us an awful lot of damage for the rest of the country. This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. That's why I'm moving forward with vaccination requirements wherever I can."

The president said he thinks the US is "awful close" to having enough of its population vaccinated though he added that he's not a scientist. "But one thing is for certain. A quarter of the country can't go unvaccinated and us not continue to have a problem."

As for the Moderna and J&J jabs, boosters will likely be approved for those as well.

"Well, I think what's going to happen is you're going to see that, in the near term — or we're probably going to open this up anyway," he told reporters after a speech on the administration's vaccination campaign. "They're constantly looking at — we're looking at both Moderna and J&J. And we're both — as I said in the speech — in addition to that, we're also looking to the time when we're going to be able to expand the booster shots, basically, across the board."

At one point during the briefing, Biden said in response to a question that the US vaccination rate would need to be essentially 100% for the American economy to return to "normal".

REPORTER: How many Americans need to be vaccinated before getting back to normal?

BIDEN: Well, I think, look — I think we get the vast majority. 97, 98 percent. pic.twitter.com/mQ4ekSH5jN

— August Takala (@RudyTakala) September 27, 2021

To be clear, that directly contradicts findings from scientists who believe COVID is now endemic in the human population and will never go away completely.

Furthermore, here is the all-knowing Fauci in May:

“If we get to the president’s goal - which I believe we will attain - of getting 70 percent of people getting at least one dose, adults that is, by July 4, there will be enough protection in the community that I really don’t foresee there being the risk of a surge."

Bear in mind that Norway, which has just lifted 100% of all its COVID restrictions and has actually returned to normal, has a 67% vaccination rate among its population.

Readers can watch two clips from the briefing below:

POTUS about to get his COVID booster. The shot is from Pfizer. #POTUS pic.twitter.com/DWtvRHioFM

— Edward Lawrence (@EdwardLawrence) September 27, 2021

President Biden receives Covid booster shot. pic.twitter.com/P5SzNWUpiG

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) September 27, 2021

And readers can watch the full press briefing below:

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/27/2021 - 19:20

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

NY Gov Confirms National Guard Will Fill In For Fired Healthcare Workers Who Refuse Vax

ORIGINAL LINK
NY Gov Confirms National Guard Will Fill In For Fired Healthcare Workers Who Refuse Vax

As New York braces for a flood of unemployed front-line healthcare workers who refuse to get the Covid-19 vaccine (regardless of whether they have 'natural immunity' from a previous infection), Governor Kathy Hochul (D) made it official on Monday - that the National Guard will be deployed to fill vacancies after hundreds of hospital workers are set to be fired effective this evening.

Effective midnight tonight, nurses and hospital staff that did not get the vaccine will be fired

NY Gov Hochul will deploy the National Guard to fill for the hospital staff shortages pic.twitter.com/5qojb82Idy

— Jewish Deplorable (@TrumpJew2) September 27, 2021

The move comes after Hochul previously threatened to replace unvaccinated hospital workers with 'foreign workers'.

Once heralded as heroes for treating Covid patients before the vaccine, front-line healthcare workers who refuse to take the jab are in good company with teachers, police, NBA players, and other professionals whose unions have opposed vaccine mandates.

According to CDC irector Rochelle Walensky, the loss of unvaccinated healthcare workers is a 'challenge.'

As Jack Phillips of the Epoch Times writes:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky said COVID-19 vaccine mandates for healthcare workers will likely create staff shortages around the United States, coming as some hospital CEOs have issued warnings.

We have seen that these vaccine mandates get more people vaccinated,” Walensky said during a “Good Morning America” appearance on Monday. “It absolutely creates a challenge. What I would say is [we need] to do some work … to understand where their hesitancy is so we can get them vaccinated and get them back to work,” she said.

In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a Saturday statement that she may direct the state’s National Guard to replace healthcare workers who resign or are terminated due to the state’s vaccine mandate. The governor also floated the idea of using out-of-state nurses, accredited healthcare workers from other countries, or tapping retired nurses who were vaccinated to replace them.

During her interview Monday, Walensky acknowledged that staff shortages “absolutely” create “a challenge” and didn’t offer a definitive plan to address the potential shortfall of healthcare workers.

“What I would say is [we need] to do some work, to educate these healthcare workers,” she added, “to meet them where they are, to understand where their hesitancy is so we can get them vaccinated and get them back to work.”

The deadline for New York state’s healthcare workers to receive the Covid vaccine is Monday, Sept. 27. According to the governor’s office, about 16 percent of the state’s medical workers have not received the vaccine.

Earlier this month, Lewis County Health System Chief Executive Officer Gerald Cayer said the Lewis County General Hospital in Lowville will not have the capacity to deliver babies in the near future after six employees at the firm’s maternity ward resigned instead of taking the vaccine.

If we can pause the service and now focus on recruiting nurses who are vaccinated, we will be able to reengage in delivering babies here in Lewis County,” Cayer said at a news conference on Sept. 10.

A federal judge on Sept. 14 temporarily suspended the statewide vaccination mandate for healthcare workers after a group of healthcare workers filed a lawsuit against the state, arguing that their Constitutional rights were violated because religious exemptions were not allowed.

Last week, 10 individual state hospital security officers filed a lawsuit against Hochul, Heath Commissioner Howard Zucker, and the New York State Health Department and are seeking to partake in regular COVID-19 testing instead of being forced to receive the vaccine.

Tyler Durden Mon, 09/27/2021 - 18:40

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Why are the FDA and CDC advisory panel members so afraid to debate COVID Vaccine Safety?

ORIGINAL LINK

Guest Post by Steve Kirsch

Recently, both the FDA and CDC advisory panels have voted to approve COVID vaccine booster shots for certain groups of people.

I believe that that vote was a mistake. They should have voted to stop the vaccines entirely and replace it with early treatment protocols since such protocols are safer and more effective than the vaccines. Instead, they completely avoided talking about the issue in their meetings and they refused all reasonable attempts to be challenged on what the science actually shows.

How we got here

Let’s recap a quick history of how I came to this conclusion.

In early May, my friends reported death and disability after being vaccinated. I started looking at the data and the more I looked, the more troubled I became. I arranged to tell the world what I learned on Bret Weinstein’s Darkhorse Podcast with my friend Robert Malone. That video went viral with almost 1M views before YouTube censored it. Here is the one hour version.

Fast forward to  September 17, 2021. I spoke out about the vaccines in the public input section of the FDA advisory meeting. I said that everyone was avoiding the elephant in the room: that the vaccines kill more people than they save. Nobody on the panel was paying attention to my talk. This is pretty typical. I wasn’t offended. But the public was listening and I got millions of impressions on my talk. No one in the mainstream media contacted me to challenge my statement.

New results show two stopping conditions were triggered

After the meeting, I did some additional research (summarized here) and I discovered that two stopping conditions have been triggered:

  1. The vaccines have killed over 150,000 Americans. I verified this 7 different ways.
  2. The vaccines kill more people than they save for all age groups

The most troubling thing to the panel members is that both stopping conditions are now validated in the peer reviewed scientific literature.

I have attempted to point this out to the panel in multiple emails which I’ve posted to my Gab account.

I offered to share the original research. No interest.

I offered to share the studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals backing up what I found. No interest.

Next, I offered to donate to their research if they would debate a team of scientists on the two stopping conditions. They could name any donation amount they wanted to make it worth their time.  No interest.

I pointed out that 100% of the hundreds of people I surveyed wanted to see an open debate on this as soon as possible (and not see the debate happen in slow motion in the scientific literature). No interest.

America wants a debate ASAP. The CDC and FDA committee members refuse to discuss this. They won’t debate my team under any conditions.

And I even named the team:

  1. Jessica Rose
  2. Mathew Crawford
  3. Chris Martenson
  4. Bret Weinstein
  5. Byram Bridle
  6. Myself

Let’s be very clear: no researcher would refuse a $1M academic research grant for a two hour debate unless they were hiding something very serious.

At this point, I must conclude that this is a tacit admission that we are right about our two stopping conditions being triggered and that the vaccines should be immediately halted.

The message that the committee is sending to America could not be more clear:

Summary

One of our team members sent me this message after my final message to the committee members asking them to debate the key issues.

We really need to call out these people and make it as public as possible that they refuse to talk based on the science. The public does not need a deep understanding of the science. If they see that we have our team of gladiators in the arena and no other team in the entire world is willing to step in, that will speak volumes. Even those who are firmly entrenched on the other side will have to start asking why their champions are showing such cowardice.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Australia’s astonishing tyranny keeps growing



In the early summer of 1798, an Irish stone mason named Philip Cunningham reached his breaking point. Cunningham was sick and tired of English rule in Ireland. And along with 50,000 of his fellow Irishmen, Cunningham picked up a weapon and started in uprising against Great Britain.

ORIGINAL LINK

COVID Jabs Are Killing Two People for Every Person Saved





ORIGINAL LINK

CEO Canceled for Calling Out Obesity Impact in COVID Outcomes





ORIGINAL LINK

A Lifeline from Buenos Aires



Guest Post by David O’Reilly Dr. Hector Carvallo, retired University of Buenos Aires professor of medicine, and his wife Dr. Mirta Carvallo on their last vacation before COVID-19 hit. The unstoppable disease inspired Hector to make one of the most important life-saving discoveries of the pandemic.

ORIGINAL LINK

German Government Moves to Regulate Telegram in Order to Curb "Corona Disinformation"



Social media has become the vanguard for big tech's censorship of any journalism, science, or free speech which challenges the narratives cast by the governments and their mainstream media conduits through big tech's hegemony.

ORIGINAL LINK

Costco limits purchases on paper goods, water & key items amid supply chain delays



Costco confirmed it will start limiting purchases on essential household products for what has become a perfect storm of supply chain delays for many retailers.

ORIGINAL LINK

If you thought the worker shortage was bad now, just wait : Over HALF of US employers plan to push vaccine mandates, resulting in mass DEATH of U.S. workers



(Natural News) A new survey has found that at least half of America’s employers are planning to try to force their employees to get “vaccinated” for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19).

ORIGINAL LINK

17,503 DEAD, 1.7 Million Injured (50% SERIOUS) Reported in European Union’s Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 Shots



by Editor, Health Impact News The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.

ORIGINAL LINK

Sunday, September 26, 2021

Italy Orders Companies Not To Pay Unvaccinated Workers

ORIGINAL LINK
The Italian government recently announced a mandatory vaccine passport for both the public and private sectors and announced that workers that cannot show a vaccine passport will have their pay withheld. The post Italy Orders Companies Not To Pay Unvaccinated Workers first appeared on SAGACIOUS NEWS.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

A Lifeline from Buenos Aires

ORIGINAL LINK

Guest Post by David O’Reilly

Dr. Hector Carvallo’s discovery that ivermectin prevents COVID-19 is saving thousands of lives and helping open regions and cities of the world to normal life. So why is he constantly attacked?

Dr. Hector Carvallo, retired University of Buenos Aires professor of medicine, and his wife Dr. Mirta Carvallo on their last vacation before COVID-19 hit. The unstoppable disease inspired Hector to make one of the most important life-saving discoveries of the pandemic.

 

The novel coronavirus COVID-19 was already looking dangerous in February of 2020. More than 75,000 cases had been reported in China, the death toll was approaching 3,000, and virologists around the world were warning of an epidemic—with no medicine to fight it.

Then, late in the month, Mirta Carvallo, M.D. a retired pediatric dermatologist in Buenos Aires, Argentina, heard a rumor. “Something’s going on with ivermectin in Australia,” she told her husband, Hector. Researchers at Monash University had reportedly neutralized the Covid virus in laboratory tests, she said.

A retired endocrinologist, professor of internal medicine, and former director of one of the city’s largest hospitals, Hector Carvallo, then 63, was instantly intrigued. An anti-parasitic medicine, ivermectin has saved millions in the southern hemisphere from the plague of onchocerciasis, or river blindness.

He and Mirta had prescribed it countless times for dermatologic ailments like scabies and rosacea, and he calls it “one of the safest medicines I’ve ever used.” Acclaimed as one of the most important medicines of the 20th century, ivermectin won its discoverers the Nobel Prize in 2015.

Within weeks—long before the Australians even reported their findings—Carvallo and a colleague would conduct the first human trials of ivermectin for prevention in the fight against Covid.

“I am not ashamed to say I cried when we got the results,” Carvallo recalls in a recent Zoom interview.

Alas, months later, “I cried again,” Carvallo says. That’s when medical authorities in Argentina—and soon others around the world—began their ongoing effort to suppress public knowledge of ivermectin’s efficacy and safety, and to question Carvallo’s results and attack his reputation.

It’s a story the world, and history, needs to know.


One of the hospitals in Buenos Aries where Dr. Hector Carvallo, a retired professor at the University of Buenos Aires medical school, launched his ground-breaking study showing the efficacy of ivermectin in preventing COVID-19. (Photo by Info Region)

Soft-spoken and gracious, Carvallo speaks impeccable English, some of it learned watching the 1960s American TV medical dramas Dr. Kildare and Ben Casey that inspired him, as a small boy, to become a doctor.

Days after Mirta told him about the rumors out of Australia, he explains, he sat down with Roberto Hirsch, M.D., one of Argentina’s leading experts on infectious diseases, to mull ivermectin’s possibilities.

While little known in North America and Europe except as a veterinary de-worming medicine, ivermectin was known to inhibit RNA viruses in vitro, including dengue, Zika and yellow fever—apparently by blocking the virus’ ability to transport from a cell’s watery cytoplasm to its nucleus.  But what happens in a petri dish doesn’t always happen in the human body. Could ivermectin be as potent against Covid, they wondered, as it was against river blindness?

And so, in early March—three months before the Australians would report in the journal Antiviral Research that ivermectin had effected a 5,000-fold reduction of Covid in vitro—Carvallo and Hirsch wrote to the Journal of the American Medical Association about its exciting possibilities.

Noting ivermectin’s “virucidal properties,” their letter theorized that ivermectin could be a safe, potent, widely available and cheap prophylaxis against Covid, urgently in need of swift investigation. They further hypothesized that it could be efficacious against Covid infections in combination with a blood thinner to reduce dangerous hyper-coagulation, and a corticosteroid to reduce the hyper-inflammatory immune response that was turning Covid infections fatal in so many patients.

“But the editor of JAMA said he was not interested. He gave us no good reason,” Carvallo recalls with a shrug. “I was surprised. I wrote to say, ‘At least take it as a possibility,’ but we never heard back. So, we decided to form our own trials. We would replicate what the Australians had done in vitro, but we would do it in vivo.”

Instead of testing ivermectin against Covid in a glass dish, they would test it in the human body.

First, they approached the ethics committee of Eurnekian Hospital, where they worked, one of Buenos Aires’ largest. Their proposal: to administer weekly oral doses of ivermectin to about 100 of the hospital’s health care workers regularly exposed to Covid patients. (The doses would be about three times higher than is typically prescribed as an anti-parasitic, but there was ample evidence these were safe levels, Carvallo says.) One hundred other health care workers who chose not to take ivermectin would serve as the control. All participants would continue to wear masks and wash hands.

A lengthy randomized controlled double-blind study with placebos—the putative “gold standard” of medicine trials—would be unethical, Carvallo and Hirsh agreed. “If I had to post my hypothesis atop a pile of corpses, that’s criminal,” says Carvallo. Instead, theirs would be another classic form of medical research: An “observational” trial: no one would receive placebos, and the trial’s administrators would know who got the ivermectin and who did not.

The hospital’s administrators were “elated” by the proposal, says Carvallo, and Buenos Aires’ health office swiftly approved its protocols. A county judge signed off, too.


Dr. Hector Carvallo (back row), with medical university students immediately before Argentina’s lockdown, presenting Eurnekian Hospital’s new journal and announcing the start of the ivermectin trials.

Unfunded, informal, and using donated medicine, the trial began in late April, with 131 subjects taking ivermectin and 98 not. Each person in the test group was given 8 mg of ivermectin per hundred pounds of body weight once weekly, along with several daily nasal spritzes of carrageenan, shown effective in reducing intake of rhinoviruses and other airborne pathogens.

A month later, Carvallo and Hirsch could scarcely believe the results. “Among the 98 who did not take ivermectin, eleven had contracted the virus,” he recalls in our interview. “Of the 131 [who received ivermectin], nobody had.

“Word spread quickly through the hospital, and the union representing our health care workers demanded the prophylaxis be given to everyone [on staff] who wanted it.” With so large a volunteer pool suddenly available, he and Hirsch undertook a second, expanded phase of the trial.

This time they recruited 966 more health care workers at Eurnekian and three other Argentine hospitals while continuing to treat the original 229 subjects. Beginning June 1 and continuing to August 1, they received weekly doses of the ivermectin/carrageenan protocol, while the 407 in the control did not. All continued to observe PPE guidelines.

At the trial’s close in August (ended because they’d run out of free medicines), 237 of the 407 participants in the control group, or 58.2 percent, were infected. Among the 788 patients treated with the ivermectin/carrageenan protocol, nose swabs and assessments of symptoms showed no evidence of Covid infection. “None,” says Carvallo.

By then they had launched an observational treatment trial of patients already infected with Covid, modeled on the protocol they had proposed months earlier to JAMA. Starting in June they enrolled 135 outpatients presenting mild Covid symptoms, and 32 inpatients with moderate to severe symptoms.

All were given ivermectin weekly, based on body weight and severity of symptoms, typically oral drops in doses ranging between 24 and 48 milligrams. All hospitalized participants received 4 mg of the corticosteroid dexamethasone by injection, and aspirin or a blood thinner depending on severity of symptoms. The most seriously ill were on ventilators.

After four weeks, none of the 135 outpatients required hospitalization, and one inpatient had died. That was an 82-year-old man, with severe co-morbidities, who had been admitted at the hospital in a desperate condition.

The 3.2 percent death rate for those on the IDEA protocol, as they called it, was one-seventh the then-prevailing 23.5 percent death rate for hospitalized Covid patients in Argentina, they later reported in the Journal of Clinical Trials.


Dr. Roberto Hirsch, one of Argentina’s leading experts on infectious diseases, teamed with Dr. Hector Carvallo to test ivermectin’s efficacy in preventing Covid.

In July, Carvallo and Hirsch submitted their preliminary findings to Argentina’s Ministry of Health. The rest they sent in August.

“A few days later I received a call at home from the health minister’s secretary,” remembers Carvallo, shaking his head. “He said I was not allowed to keep investigating ivermectin, or it would put my job in jeopardy. I was baffled. I said, ‘Why?’ and he would give me no answer.” The usually gracious Carvallo had harsh words for the health minister before hanging up.

“And that’s when I cried again, from frustration. I’m not ashamed to say I cried, because it’s true.”

A year and a half later, with the Delta variant on the rise—and reports of an even more virulent strain circulating in the Amazon rain forest—ivermectin still struggles for official recognition as an anti-Covid agent despite the large body of research in its favor.

In May, 2021, for example, the journal Antibiotics Review published a metanalysis of ivermectin showing that “100 percent of 36 early treatment and prophylaxis studies report positive effects” against Covid, with 26 of those trials reporting “statistically significant improvements.”

Yet three months later, in August, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was still pounding the same drum it first pounded in June, 2020, when the Australian researchers published their findings.

“Taking a drug meant for horses and cattle to prevent or treat COVID-19 is dangerous and could be fatal,” the FDA warned in August. Carvallo calls the mockery and disinformation “very frustrating.” (But in this vacuum of official censorship of the drug, he still doesn’t want people self-prescribing ivermectin—not because it’s dangerous, but because they might take too low a dose or not at the proper frequency.)

Lately, the fight has become even more pointed. On September 2, BuzzFeed News published a long, critical examination of Carvallo’s ivermectin studies which, it said, “raised questions about how the study’s data was collected and analyzed,” they say. (You can read the BuzzFeed story here.) Carvallo disputes the story as medically uninformed, saying his was a legitimate observational trial.

“It’s not a matter of ignorance,” Carvallo insists of the backlash against ivermectin. “The NIH, the CDC, the FDA—they’ve all read the studies. They just don’t care, because there’s a double standard. The more expensive a compound is, the less quantity of evidence is required to get it approved. “But when a compound is cheap and available,” he says, “that’s another matter.”

He told BuzzFeed it’s only a matter of time before ivermectin is widely approved to fight Covid. “All truth passes through three phases,” he told them. “First it is ridiculed, then it is violently opposed, then it is accepted as self-evident. We are in phase two now.”



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Here’s Why the Government Response to COVID Should Trouble You

ORIGINAL LINK

Via International Man

The Great Reset

I COME FROM A LAND DOWN UNDER …where rights are ripped asunder.

Actually, it’s rather ironic that the catchy song from which I took the above headline, “The Land Down Under,” is written and sung by the band “Men at Work”.

Why is that ironic? Because right now men in Australia are decidedly NOT at work. They are instead on the sofa, attached to the WiFi, their rights stripped from them under the ridiculous guise of a pandemic, unless, of course, they’re deemed by some pointy-shoe beaurocrat as “essential.”

The Great Reset barrels ahead in Australia at a blistering pace. All hail the albino snail that lost his shell.

The damage already done is incalculable, and yet to come is much, much more because we have of course been promised much more. All the while the sheeple sleep, sound in the belief their leaders are protecting them and keeping them safe.

Some have said that the Australian government has lost the plot. No, they haven’t. Suggesting that provides a plausibility to their actions. There is none. It is not possible to implement such far reaching, damaging rules and regulations by merely being incompetent, and certainly not for such a length of time, where the evidence piles high that highlight the innefectiveness of the experimental gene therapies, constantly changing protocols and mandates (no mask, one mask, two masks, etc.), and control groups such as Sweden, which instead of being used as a proof of evidence are chastised and ignored, or where the country sporting the greatest deaths per capita is simultaneously the country most vaccinated: Israel.

No, only an idiot would look at all of this and conclude that it is mere incompetence. Only an idiot would look at this and conclude that it is being done in good faith.

No this is planned. It is, folks, “the great reset” that the global elites scumbags drool over.

Davos man has been hard at work. And you may say, “Well, they have no real power. I mean, they don’t pass these laws.” True. They don’t need to. Instead, like a mob boss who never brings out the baseball bat to beat the victim, relying instead on his henchman, today it is gutless invertebrates that out of sheer cowardice follow them.

Corporates, CEOs, governors, local elected officials. And, of course, there is the media — the poisoned chalice that never stops giving. Driving the hysteria, and boy has it worked. More clicks, more eyeballs. Then, of course, there is the fact that the revenue model for media has flipped to one of advertising. And so it is that the advertisers pull the strings.

For context, Bill Gates, via various structures, owns 113 media outlets.

And don’t get me started on the “fact checkers.” These are the folks telling Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier (whose field of expertise is virology) to stand down and stop spreading “misinformation.” The same folks telling us that the inventor of mRNA technology Dr. Robert Malone doesn’t know what he’s talking about when he yells from the rooftops that we’re in the process of committing a slow motion global genocide.

It is surreal. I understand that, but just because it’s surreal doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

We look at evidence, such as this.

But when we look around us the outcomes of this evidence are nowhere to be found. Everyone dutifully scans into shops, dons a useless, dirty mask ensuring they breathe their own carbon dioxide back into their body along with the chemicals from the mask.

Here is the issue, folks, and it’s dead bloody serious. This is a colossal deception based on fraud and lies. The governments of Australia, New Zealand, the US, Canada, all those in the European Union, and the UK have borrowed sums of money that will never ever be paid back.

A father and his daughter in a park. Their crime? Unmasked.

Sadly, one can see exactly where this is all headed. Most everyone knows exactly what Auschwitz and the numerous “facilities” like it were. We also know that many of the victims actually willingly went to these camps. Heck, some paid the rail fare to get there, such was the power of the propaganda.

And yet it is hard to imagine anything like this happening again, which is, of course, why it happens. It is why history repeats itself.

When you are confronted with something so dark, so sinister, so dystopian that it makes you feel physically ill, and at the same time nobody around you seems to think it an issue it is only normal to think to yourself… well, it must be me that is mad. But you are not mad. You are the rational one. Just because you are in the minority does not mean you are wrong. It just means that you are in the minority.

Here is the new Alice Springs “quarantine” facility.

Not at all like, you know, a prison. And here are the rules.

If you’re looking at this progression of events and not alarmed, you have a screw loose. That it has as much to do with “public health” as a donkey has to do with cryptography should be obvious to all.

So what comes next? Asset seizure.

Editor’s Note: Disturbing economic, political, and social trends are already in motion and now accelerating at breathtaking speed. Most troubling of all, they cannot be stopped.

The risks that lie ahead are too big and dangerous to ignore. That’s why contrarian money manager Chris Macintosh just released the most critical report on these trends, What Happens Next. This free special report explains precisely what’s coming down the pike and what it means for your wealth and well-being. Click here to access it now.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

As Advisory Panel Warned, CDC Director's Anti-Science Decision Makes Boosters 'Available To Anyone Who Wants One'

ORIGINAL LINK
As Advisory Panel Warned, CDC Director's Anti-Science Decision Makes Boosters 'Available To Anyone Who Wants One'

Now that CDC chief Dr. Rochelle Walensky - possibly working on behalf of her political puppet masters - has overridden her agency's advisory panel to expand the eligibility for Pfizer booster jabs to high-risk workers (a group that ACIP, the advisory panel, had decided to exclude given a paucity of efficacy and safety data), many employers are confused about whether the new guidance applies to them - and whether they might be left in a difficult situation with employees who didn't get the first two vaccines.

At the end of the day, the big worry is that hundreds of thousands of shots allocated for workers might simply go unused, left to expire while dozens of poorer countries would be overjoyed to have them.

According to the Hill, chaotic and at times contradictory messaging from federal health officials has culminated in a confusing set of recommendations about who should, and shouldn't receive booster jabs, and why?

Panel members initially said they had excluded approving jabs on an employment basis because there wasn't enough evidence those people were losing protection. That decision was clearly a disappointment to the Biden Administration, which is possibly why Dr. Walensky interceded.

The depth of Dr. Walsensky's contradiction of the science can be found in the exact wording of her decree: Starting immediately, anyone between the ages of 18 and 64 who is at increased risk of COVID-19 "exposure and transmission because of occupational or institutional setting" can get a third dose.

Legal experts told the Hill that those words are so vague, practically anyone could qualify. Already, many local level officials appear to be leaning toward simply giving boosters to anyone who asks.

"There's going to be confusion. If we are going to create guidelines that are essentially making the vaccine available to almost everyone, the simplest solution is, make it available to everyone," said Celine Gounder, an infectious disease specialist and epidemiologist at NYU and Bellevue Hospital. "The best public health programs are the ones that are simple and easy to understand and clear, and the more complexity you build into it, the more difficult it is to roll out."

That statement above about not creating obstacles to the third shot - that's coming from a scientist who doubted whether they were even necessary.

Gounder, who advised the Biden transition team on COVID-19, has been critical of the administration's fervent push for boosters, and said the evidence for a third dose based on occupation was mixed at best.

"You have to step back and ask the question, why is it that we're vaccinating people in high risk settings? Is it because they as individuals are at high risk, or is it because it would be disruptive to the workplace," Gounder said.

As far as the dramatic conclusion to what was supposed to be a 'staid' scientific process - the CDC director overruling her advisory panel on the issue of occupancy-based eligibility in a late night statement - that should be enough to alert Americans that something strange is happening. Despite the panel's claims, Dr. Walensky took to the White House press briefing on Friday to claim that she did not "overrule" the advisory committee and that she had listened to both sides on the issue of whether to approve boosters by occupational risk.

Amusingly, the assiduously pro-Democratic the Washington Post was willing to dismiss this usurpation of "the science" as simply another communications breakdown from the doddering Dems.

“Everyone is kind of confused,” he said. The current discontent has deep roots. In April, Pfizer chief executive Albert Bourla said a third coronavirus dose was “likely” to be needed. In late July, Pfizer-BioNTech announced that their vaccine’s efficacy waned over time. Data from Israel confirmed a drop. Then, last month, as the delta variant of the coronavirus surged and the World Health Organization decried the distribution of third shots in wealthy countries while poor countries were lacking first doses, President Biden announced that most Americans could begin getting boosters of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines Sept. 20 — subject to the government’s regulatory processes, which unfolded in recent days and focused only on Pfizer. Regulators already allowed third shots for the immunocompromised who have received Pfizer or Moderna shots but have not yet made recommendations for all recipients of the Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines.

The deluge of phone calls about booster shots to Primary Health clinics in Southwestern Idaho began weeks ago. On Friday morning, the group’s Garden City clinic, where Maddie Morris fields inquiries, saw an increase in calls, mostly from senior citizens.

“The calls seem pretty nonstop,” the customer service representative said. “It seems like a lot of people are anxious to get a booster.”

Doctors say confusion clouds patients’ willingness to receive boosters. In Idaho, the problem coincides with the primary health-care system’s struggle to meet the demands of the latest covid-19 crush, which earlier this month plunged the state into crisis standards of care — essentially the rationing of health care as demand overwhelms resources.

Unfortunately for them, it looks like the whole thing is back-firing...

Maybe they'll think twice next time around (though we doubt it, since 'next time' is literally happening in the coming weeks when they do this all again with Moderna).

Tyler Durden Sun, 09/26/2021 - 13:30

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Australia bans ivermectin for COVID-19, blocks early treatment to push its jab agenda





ORIGINAL LINK

MANIPULATION: 40-45 percent of “COVID hospitalizations” had some other reason for admission, new study reveals





ORIGINAL LINK




ORIGINAL LINK

Friday, September 24, 2021

Murder rates spike 30%, biggest increase on record

ORIGINAL LINK

stalker-shadow-e1505343476769.jpg

(HEADLINE USA) – The year 2020 saw the largest spike in murder rates in U.S. history, the New York Times reported. The largest previous change on record was a 12.7% spike in 1968. Last year’s surge nearly tripled the old record.

Though the change occurred throughout the country, large urban centers got hit the hardest. Murder rates increased by 35% in cities with populations of over 250,000 people.

While the legacy media has largely blamed former President Donald Trump for the spike, it appears likely that increased murder rates are due to highly publicized efforts to “Defund the Police” and unconstitutional coronavirus lockdowns.

Read the full story ›

The post Murder rates spike 30%, biggest increase on record appeared first on WND.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

More Than 726,000 COVID Vaccine Injuries Reported to VAERS as CDC, FDA Overrule Advisory Committees’ Recommendations on Third Pfizer Shot

ORIGINAL LINK

Data released Sept. 17 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that between Dec. 14, 2020 and Sept. 17, 2021, a total of 726,965 adverse events following COVID vaccines were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The data included a total of 15,386 reports of deaths — an increase of 461 over the previous week.

There were 99,410 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 7,887 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” filed in VAERS, 569,294 adverse events, including 6,981 deaths and 44,481 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020 and Sept. 17, 2021.

Of the 6,981 U.S. deaths reported as of Sept. 17, 12% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 17% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 30% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 383.6 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Sept. 17. This includes: 220 million doses of Pfizer, 149 million doses of Moderna and 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

From the 9-17-21 release of VAERS data

The data come directly from reports submitted to VAERS, the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date, usually about a week prior to the release date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.

This week’s U.S. data for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

The most recent deaths involve a 17-year old male (VAERS I.D. 1689212) with cancer who was vaccinated April 17, tested positive for COVID on July 20, was hospitalized and passed away Aug. 29; and a 16-year old female (VAERS I.D. 1694568) who died from a pulmonary embolism nine days after receiving her first Pfizer dose.

Other recent reported deaths include two patients [VAERS I.D. 1655100] who died after their second dose of Pfizer, including a 13-year old female, a 15-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 1498080) who previously had COVID, was diagnosed with cardiomyopathy in May 2021 and died four days after receiving his second dose of Pfizer’s vaccine when he collapsed on the soccer field and went into ventricular tachycardia; and a 13-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1505250) who died after suffering a heart condition after receiving her first dose of Pfizer.

This week’s U.S. VAERS data, from Dec. 14, 2020 to Sept. 17, 2021, for all age groups combined, show:

CDC overrules agency’s own vaccine safety committee, sides with FDA on boosters

In an “unusual move,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, CDC director, on Thursday overruled her agency’s vaccine advisory committee recommendation to limit Pfizer’s COVID booster shot for people 65 and older, long-term care facility residents and certain people with underlying conditions.

Instead, Walensky aligned with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) authorization of a third dose of Pfizer’s vaccine for a broader population, including healthcare workers, grocery store workers, teachers and others whose jobs put them at “high risk” of infections, plus residents of prisons and homeless shelters.

CDC director disregarded advice of agency’s vaccine advisory committee, clearing way for healthcare workers, teachers, and residents of long-term care facilities, homeless shelters and prisons to get a third Pfizer COVID shot.https://t.co/sYxt7S8y2t

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) September 24, 2021

President Biden today acted on the news, announcing his administration will begin to deliver booster shots this week, Politico reported.

The CDC’s vaccine advisory panel in a meeting Thursday voted unanimously to approve booster doses of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine for people 65 and older, long-term care facility residents and certain people with underlying conditions. The booster dose would be given at least six months after being fully vaccinated.

However, the advisers voted against recommending a booster dose for people whose jobs or situations put them at high risk of vaccine breakthrough infection.

Subscribe to The Defender - It’s Free!

  • Name*
    First Last
  • Email*
  • Hidden
    Date
    MM slash DD slash YYYY
  • Hidden
    Source
  • Phone
    This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

FDA ignores safety committee’s guidance, broadly authorizes boosters

The FDA on Wednesday amended the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine to allow for a single booster shot to be administered to people 65 and older.

In addition to older Americans, the FDA authorized boosters for people 18 through 64 years of age at high risk of severe illness from COVID, and also those “whose frequent institutional or occupational exposure” to the virus puts them at high risk of serious complications from the disease caused by the virus, the agency said.

On Sept. 17, the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) unanimously recommended EUA for a booster dose of Pfizer’s vaccine for people 65 and older and those with compromised immune systems — but the committee voted 16 to 2 against recommending boosters for the general population, citing a lack of long-term data. The committee said the risks did not outweigh the benefits for those people.

Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said the agency considered the committee’s input, but conducted it’s own review of the data in reaching a decision.

Experts tell FDA vaccines ‘harm more people than they save’

During the public comment session at VRBPAC’s Sept. 17 meeting, numerous experts said data supporting Pfizer’s request for booster doses was inadequate.

Several people highlighted concerning patterns with data from VAERS — requesting more attention be given to potential signals and reported adverse events.

Dr. Jessica Rose, a viral immunologist and virologist said there are clear risk signals emerging from VAERS data — with a 1000% increase in the total number of adverse events for 2021 so far.

Rose pointed out that as of Aug. 27, there were 1,500 adverse reactions occurring per million fully injected people, and 1 in 660 individuals reporting immunological adverse events associated with the COVID products. She said underreporting was not considered in the data.

Dr. Joseph Fraiman, an emergency medicine physician in New Orleans, said during his presentation to the FDA’s safety panel that no clinical evidence exists to disprove claims the COVID vaccines are harming more people than they save.

Steve Kirsch, founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, using data from four different analyses, said even if the vaccines had 100% protection, it still means we kill two people to save one life.

Physician ‘horribly injured’ after Pfizer vaccine pleads with U.S. agencies for help

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Danice Hertz, a 64-year-old physician who is “horribly ill” and “incapacitated” after getting Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, claims U.S. health agencies are ignoring thousands of adverse events.

Dr. Hertz said people like her who have been seriously injured by COVID vaccines are being ignored + because health officials won’t research their injuries + potential treatments, they have nowhere to turn.#TheDefender: https://t.co/zL66EdwTnDhttps://t.co/ahmaX2UiPF

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) September 23, 2021

Hertz told The Defender there are thousands of people like her — injured by COVID vaccines — who are suffering and need help, yet they’re ignored by mainstream media and U.S. health agencies.

Meanwhile, COVID vaccine mandates are being rolled out for millions of Americans, with barely any discussion of the risks, she said.

Hertz said those injured by the vaccines are struggling to get validation and medical care because these reactions are being hidden from the medical community.

She said the FDA, CDC, and National Institutes of Health have known about vaccine injuries since the clinical trials, yet are not giving informed consent — fully disclosing the possible risks associated with vaccines and allowing the individual to decide.

“This is truly shocking,” Hertz said. “Having practiced medicine for 33 years, I always had faith in our regulatory agencies. Now, having been seriously injured by this vaccine and struggling to be taken seriously and get medical assistance, I no longer have faith.”

30,000 women in UK report menstrual problems after COVID shots

As of Sept. 2, more than 30,000 reports of menstrual irregularities and vaginal bleeding had been made to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) Yellow Card Scheme — the UK system for collecting and monitoring adverse reactions following COVID vaccines.

According to an editorial published Sept. 16 in The BMJ, reports of adverse reactions include heavier-than-usual periods, delayed periods and unexpected vaginal bleeding. Yet, none of the COVID vaccine manufacturers list any issues pertinent to menstrual health as a side effect, and no research was done to assess the effects of the vaccines on the menstrual cycle during clinical trials.

According to VAERS, between Dec. 14, 2020 and Sept. 17, 2021, there have been 9,589 total reports, including U.S. and some foreign, of menstrual disorders after vaccination with a COVID vaccine.

Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events, which means the number of actual adverse events evolving menstrual disorders could be much higher.

Pfizer says COVID vaccine for 5- 1o 11-year-olds ‘safe’ and shows ‘robust’ antibody response

Pfizer said Monday a phase 2/3 trial showed its COVID vaccine was safe and generated a “robust” antibody response in children ages 5 to 11, but experts warned Pfizer’s data is misleading, and some questioned the need for kids to be vaccinated in the first place.

These are the first results released for this age group for a COVID vaccine, and the data has not yet been peer-reviewed or published.

Pfizer said it plans to request EUA from the FDA soon. FDA officials said once data is submitted, the agency could authorize a vaccine for younger children in a matter of weeks.

Dr. Elizabeth Mumper, pediatrician, president and CEO of The RIMLAND Center and member of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Scientific Advisory Committee, in an email to The Defender said, Pfizer did not share specific data on efficacy or side effects and relied on measurements of antibody responses — extrapolating from adult data to imply protection. Mumper said CHD remains skeptical of “science by press release.”

New study questions need for vaccinating children against COVID

As The Defender reported this week, a new study published in Science Direct questioned the need for vaccinating children against COVID. The study found the bulk of official COVID-attributed deaths per capita occurred mostly in the elderly with high comorbidities, while COVID-attributed deaths were negligible in children.

By comparison, the study’s authors found the bulk of normalized post-vaccination deaths occurred mostly in the elderly with high comorbidities, while the normalized post-vaccination deaths were small, but not negligible, in children.

Researchers pointed out clinical trials for COVID vaccines were very short (a few months), had samples not representative of the total population, and for adolescents/children, had poor predictive power because of their small size.

Further, clinical trials for COVID vaccines did not address changes in biomarkers that could serve as early warning indicators of elevated predisposition to serious diseases, the researchers said.

“Most importantly, the clinical trials did not address long-term effects that, if serious, would be borne by children/adolescents for potentially decades.”

198 days and counting, CDC ignores The Defender’s inquiries

According to the CDC website, “the CDC follows up on any report of death to request additional information and learn more about what occurred and to determine whether the death was a result of the vaccine or unrelated.”

On March 8, The Defender contacted the CDC with a written list of questions about reported deaths and injuries related to COVID vaccines. We have made repeated attempts, by phone and email, to obtain a response to our questions.

Despite multiple phone and email communications with many people at the CDC, and despite being told that our request was in the system and that someone would respond, we have not yet received answers to any of the questions we submitted. It has been 198 days since we sent our first email to the CDC requesting information.

Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.

The post More Than 726,000 COVID Vaccine Injuries Reported to VAERS as CDC, FDA Overrule Advisory Committees’ Recommendations on Third Pfizer Shot appeared first on Children's Health Defense.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK