Saturday, March 20, 2021

US Funded Virus Research and Used Outbreak Against Us

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.


Worrying trends in vaccine side effects [Letter from Great Britain – 03-20-21]


“The Financial Jigsaw” has been serialised here and is replaced by this weekly “Letter from Great Britain.”  NOTE If anyone would like an electronic copy of the complete book, I should be pleased to email a free PDF on request to:

This week some worrying reports are being logged about patients suffering severe side effects and death from the mRNA and Astra/Zeneca vaccines.  I have summarised the current situation from a report by my colleague at BOOM Economics:

“Vaccine uncertainty was highlighted at the end of the week by the suspension of the Astra Zeneca Covid vaccine in 10 nations, mostly in Europe, where there are now serious concerns about safety regarding blood clotting problems. A more detailed report concerning the risks of DIC from the new genetic material based vaccines is discussed below.  DIC is a fearful medical condition called disseminated intravascular coagulation.

“Denmark, Iceland and Norway [and now also Ireland and Netherlands] have suspended the use of the Oxford-Astra Zeneca Covid-19 vaccine while the European Union’s medicines regulator investigates whether the shot could be linked to a number of reports of blood clots.  Other nations taking similar actions include Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, Austria and Thailand. This amounts to 10 nations in total. [And others were subsequently were added]

Other governments are declaring the vaccine “safe and effective” in mass advertising campaigns aimed at introducing the new vaccine technologies on a large scale.  More and more people are choosing to no longer believe them.

            BOOM readers must read this letter which was sent to the European Medicines Agency on 28th February. It was also sent to Ursula Von Der Leyen, President of the European Commission and to Charles Michel, President of the Council of Europe.”


Read the complete BOOM article here:

BOOM refers to a distressing condition (DIC) that maybe arising from these vaccines but there are insufficient data at present to confirm any causal link.  Here is some information:

I will continue to monitor adverse effects of the vaccines as they become available.  This fifth UK government report provides details up to February 21.  The U.K. Government has released the fifth update highlighting adverse reactions to the Pfizer Covid jab and the Oxford / AstraZeneca Covid jab. It is important to note that a 2011 report by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Inc. funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found that less than one percent of all vaccine adverse events are reported to VAERS.  If this is the case then the underlying number of events approximates to 7%:

“The fifth update covers adverse reactions inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme from the 9th December 2020 up to the 21st February 2021. In the week since the fourth report, which covered reported adverse reactions up to the 14th February, there have been a further 2892 Yellow Cards for the Pfizer vaccine and a further 11,490 yellow cards for the Oxford vaccine.

            But this does not mean the Pfizer jab is safer, the reason the number of Yellow Cards for the Oxford jab is much higher than the Pfizer jab is because there was a significantly higher number of doses of the Oxford jab administered between the 14th February – 21st February compared to the Pfizer jab.

As of the 21st February 2021 there have been 9.4 million doses of the experimental MRNA Pfizer jab administered with a reported 85,179 adverse reactions suffered. There have been 8.4 million doses of the Oxford jab administered as of the same date, with a reported 157,637 adverse reactions.”

Even in my local area we are getting reports of sudden deaths.  It seems that a reaction to the vaccine appears when the patient becomes infected with the virus after inoculation.  “A ‘devastating’ outbreak of coronavirus at a care home in Exmouth has now claimed the lives of nine residents.  Brandon House, a dementia specialist care home in Douglas Avenue, recorded its first case of Covid-19 last month. It has also been confirmed that two residents remain ‘quite poorly’.

All residents at the home received their first Covid-19 vaccine in January.  It’s the second care home in East Devon to be hit by an outbreak in recent weeks.  Police have launched an investigation at Holmesley Care Home in Fortescue Road, Sidmouth, where three deaths have now been confirmed. The majority of residents and staff there have tested positive for coronavirus.”

Clearly this raises issues about whether to have the jab as is being so heavily promoted by all the authorities and BigPharma.  I have always believed that the public should be allowed ‘informed consent’ and obviously we are not being properly informed – we are being pressured, in the extreme, to rush into an unproven ‘protection’ from a virus which is no more lethal than a sever flu infection.  For those who would feel safer having had an inoculation – there are choices:

The Chinese SINOVAC vaccine is a traditional one in that it uses inactivated pathogen to stimulate our immune system naturally to manufacture antigens unlike the ones being used in the West which force the body to produce antigens using experimental synthetic gene therapy – genetic engineering in other words.

One of my readers in China keeps in regular touch with news from the ground floor and this is what he says about the Chinese method:  “…..recently I read some essays and videos about the ‘terrifying’ E-484 variation and its affects.  Of course, no impact on China at all, in curing, preventing or vaccines; according to Chinese medical experts.   After all, our Chinese medicine aims at improving the immunity instead of any magical expensive medicine or dangerous advanced mRNA vaccines.”

“Sinovac has published a press release reporting the results of phase III trials of CoronaVac, its COVID-19 vaccine. This is a more conventional vaccine than the mRNA and vector vaccines currently in use in the UK: it uses “killed” SARS-CoV-2 virus as the antigen. As such, it may contain a wider range of antigens, not just the spike glycoprotein, which might – in theory, at least – mean better cross-protection against virus variants.”     

The sale of the century is very much on in Britain. The powers that be want every single person to be vaccinated, and they’re pulling out all the stops to make sure it happens.  Here are the five main ways the establishment is trying to manufacture your consent.

  • It’s being reported that everyone getting vaccinated is the only way to get “back to normal”. Don’t you want to go to the pub again? Or the gym? Or see granny? Or hug people? Well, just take the shot. Take the shot and all this lockdown and social distancing economic collapse and mounting poverty, it will all just go away.
  • One of the oldest and most widely used marketing gimmicks. Partly because it works, but mostly because it’s cheap and easy: Simply find a bunch of tools and put them to work. The NHS was not shy about this approach, claiming they were planning to enlist “sensible celebrities” who are “known and loved” to combat anti-vax sentiment.  Even if their intentions are correct, there’s no reason to assume any of them have any understanding of what they’re talking about. And none of these people has anything to lose should you or a loved one suffer any harm from taking an untested vaccine.
  • For weeks now we’ve been seeing headlines about “dwindling stock” of vaccines. Everyone who has ever been inside a store knows this trick. “While stocks last”, “limited time offer”, or a thousand other variants designed to create the idea that if you don’t acquire product X right now, you will miss your chance.
  • You can’t underestimate the idea of peer pressure when it comes to marketing, one of the oldest tricks in the book is culturing popularity through the idea that popularity already exists. It’s why people buy likes and views on YouTube and concerts have seat fillers.
  • This is an interesting one. There’s been a lot of talk about Vaccine Passports recently, and perhaps they will become a thing, but the vast majority of the public discourse is spreading the idea they are “inevitable”. Now, the idea of inevitability is a powerful tool. You can encourage it as a way of preparing the ground for a policy role out, sure, but you can also use it to engender feelings of defeat in your opposition and thus gain their consent without force.

“If vaccine take-up was really at 94%, there’d be no need to sell the vaccine so much. If they were really running out of vaccines, the papers wouldn’t be advertising it, they’d be telling people not to panic.  In short, there’s good reason to think the resistance to the “new normal” is a lot more widespread than the establishment ever expected it to be.  You don’t put the Queen on a zoom call when you’re winning the argument.”

UPDATE – More European countries halt the Astra/Zeneca jab.  Germany, France, Italy and Spain temporarily halted inoculations with the vaccine last Monday after reported incidents of bleeding, blood clots and a low count of blood platelets in some people who had received the AstraZeneca shot.

And here is a short report about the Israeli situation – well worth reading as it backs up everything I have been saying:  I think TBP team will like this one!

Then, last Thursday, the European Health Regulators approved the Astra/Zeneka vaccine saying it really, really safe – nothing to see here – If you believe this, I have a bridge to sell you.

Britain has won one battle against GloboCap – at least here the little people have won a round:  Uber is to guarantee its 70,000 UK drivers a minimum hourly wage, holiday pay and pensions from today after a landmark Supreme Court ruling. It is a dramatic U-turn from insisting, like many delivery and courier companies, that its drivers are independent self-employed “partners” not entitled to basic rights enjoyed by employees. Last month the UK Supreme Court dismissed Uber’s appeal against a 2016 landmark employment tribunal ruling that its drivers should be classed as workers.

UK has agreed a trade deal with the EU. I will comment on the progression of this deal as it affects the UK economy. 

‘Barely scraping by’ after Brexit – The manufacturing trade group Make UK has found in a survey of more than 200 leading industrial companies that 74% are facing delays with EU imports and exports amid continuing disruption caused by Brexit and the pandemic. More than half of companies said they were suffering from increased costs, while more than a third had lost out on sales, and fear of continued disruption was costing them future business. Catherine Bedford, founder of Dashel, which makes carbon fibre and recycled cycle helmets, said the disruption was killing her business. “Thanks to Brexit, we’ve gone from profitable to barely scraping by,” she said. Make UK says ministers urgently needed to “get back around the table” with EU leaders to solve problems.

The collapse of Britain’s trade with the EU will continue into the summer after the failure to recruit up to 30,000 customs agents, despite government assurances that normal service has resumed industry groups have warned.  Delays and confusion at the UK’s ports, which have resulted in 40% of trucks crossing the Channel with empty containers, threatens to put hundreds of small and medium exporters out of business and cost the government millions of pounds in lost trade tariffs.

The warnings follow the most dramatic monthly fall in exports from the UK to the EU since records began 20 years ago. Exports tumbled by almost 41% as thousands of trucks failed to gain entry to the EU, mostly following customs hold-ups due to a lack of compliant paperwork.

To be continued next week.


Pompeo: Declassified intel points to Wuhan lab leak


As the World Health Organization prepares to release a report that likely will conclude the coronavirus had a natural origin, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is defending declassified U.S. intelligence that points to a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The Chinese government blocked investigators from the U.S. and other nations in the early days of the outbreak, and it continues the cover-up, Pompeo contends.

"It is absolutely imperative when this report comes out we understand the basis for the data, because I fear that in the end, this report will not be remotely reflective of what actually transpired," he told the Washington Examiner in an interview.

The report is scheduled to be released next week.

Pompeo said he doesn't believe the investigators "had either the capacity or the access necessary to actually conduct a thorough investigation of how this Wuhan virus ultimately commenced."

Congressional reports have blamed duplicity by the Chinese government and incompetence by the World Health Organization for the outbreak turing into a pandemic.

Under the Trump administration in mid-January, the Pompeo-led State Department issued a fact sheet contending Wuhan lab researchers "conducted experiments involving RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar)."

Based on information from the intelligence community, the State Department said the lab "has a published record of conducting 'gain-of-function' research to engineer chimeric viruses."

And the lab "has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military."

In Feburary, the head of the WHO investigation, Peter Ben Embarek, issued a preliminary determination. He told reporters it was "extremely unlikely" that the virus leaked from a lab in Wuhan. The team suspected the virus originated in animals before spreading to humans but didn't know how.

However, a WHO adviser said at the time that the investigation by his agency actually was conducted by Chinese officials and was very short.

"And so, the WHO investigators were basically receiving reports from the Chinese officials," Jamie Metzl told the Fox News Channel's Laura Ingraham.

All the facts point to Wuhan lab

Pompeo told the Examiner it's "absolutely critical that we get access to the people who conducted the investigation and ask them a series of questions."

"Tell me what limits were placed on who could be selected. Tell me how the individuals were chosen," Pompeo said. "Were there conflicts checks that were run?"

He also wants to know if there was anything in particular that the Chinese Communist Party didn't want the investigators to review. Did they get access to the scientists who were in the laboratory in 2019 and the early part of 2020, and were they in a position to allow them to speak freely?

Pompeo said it's also important to find out if the investigators got access to original data rather than "second-order information."

The fact sheet said the U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the Wuhan lab became sick in autumn 2019 with symptoms consistent with COVID-19, before the first identified case of the outbreak.

The State Department said "that raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli's public claim that there was 'zero infection' among the WIV's staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses."

Pompeo said "every fact that I have seen would be consistent with a release from" the Wuhan lab.

"You'll remember, if you go back to the beginning, people were throwing around language that said, 'Well, this had to have been natural, it couldn't have been manmade' — it's not really the right way to think about this problem set," he told the Examiner.

He said there are three facts that support the lab-leak theory: "the fact that it is possible they were working on a virus similar to the one that we now are suffering from, second, that inadequate biosafety measures at the facility, and then third, the massive, intentional cover-up coming from the most senior levels of the Chinese Communist Party."

Pompeo said he hopes the report will provide answers, but he's "skeptical that the Chinese Communist Party will ever permit anyone to really understand what happened there.

"I think that suggests that the alternative hypotheses about wet markets and the like are much less likely than the world originally believed,"  he said.

Pompeo criticize the Biden administration's decision to rejoin the WHO.

"At the point of maximum impact, the moment that the WHO's pandemic prevention efforts were most critical, that they had to be the most right as quickly as they could, they allowed the Chinese Communist Party to walk all over them and denied the world the access to the information that it needed in a timely fashion that could well have saved lives all across the world," he said. "And for that, the leadership at the WHO has to be held accountable."

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Pompeo: Declassified intel points to Wuhan lab leak appeared first on WND.


Bill Gates Does Reddit AMA, Dodges Questions About Meetings With Jeffrey Epstein


Via ZeroHedge

Bill Gates took to Reddit for an “Ask Me Anything” (AMA) session on Friday, where he answered all sorts of questions about vaccines, fake meat, and his favorite Mortal Kombat fighter (he’s never played).

One question he completely ignored, however, concerned his relationship with notorious and now-dead pedophile, Jeffrey Epstein – who he met with at least six times, including visits to Epstein’s recently-sold Manhattan mansion on “multiple occasions,” staying at least once into the night, according to the New York Times.

Meanwhile, Gates adviser Boris Nikolic (pictured below) was named as a fallback executor in an will Epstein amended days before his 2019 death in a Manhattan jail cell.

Several Redditors took this opportunity to ask Bill to explain himself.

“Thanks for doing this again. First of all – big fan of your humble rags-to-riches journey in which you rose against the odds from a rich, well-connected family and utilised predatory patenting to profit from publicly-funded work to sell back to the public. Very inspiring!” asks user proahteane, who followed up the complement with:

“Platitudes aside, my question is this: why were you meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after his first conviction? What could you possibly have to discuss with a prolific pedophile eugenicist?

And while the question was the 12th most upvoted, Gates completely ignored it, while answering over two-dozen lower-ranked questions.

Meanwhile, employees of the Gates foundation also visited Epstein’s mansion on multiple occasions, while Epstein also “spoke with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and JPMorgan Chase about a proposed multibillion-dollar charitable fund — an arrangement that had the potential to generate enormous fees for Mr. Epstein,” according to the Times.

In late 2011, at Mr. Gates’s instruction, the foundation sent a team to Mr. Epstein’s townhouse to have a preliminary talk about philanthropic fund-raising, according to three people who were there. Mr. Epstein told his guests that if they searched his name on the internet they might conclude he was a bad person but that what he had done — soliciting prostitution from an underage girl — was no worse than “stealing a bagel,” two of the people said. -NYT

How Gates and Epstein met, according to the New York Times;

Two members of Mr. Gates’s inner circle — Boris Nikolic and Melanie Walker — were close to Mr. Epstein and at times functioned as intermediaries between the two men.

Ms. Walker met Mr. Epstein in 1992, six months after graduating from the University of Texas. Mr. Epstein, who was an adviser to Mr. Wexner, the owner of Victoria’s Secret, told Ms. Walker that he could land her an audition for a modeling job there, according to Ms. Walker. She later moved to New York and stayed in a Manhattan apartment building that Mr. Epstein owned. After she graduated from medical school, she said, Mr. Epstein hired her as a science adviser in 1998.

Ms. Walker later met Steven Sinofsky, a senior executive at Microsoft who became president of its Windows division, and moved to Seattle to be with him. In 2006, she joined the Gates Foundation with the title of senior program officer.

At the foundation, Ms. Walker met and befriended Mr. Nikolic, a native of what is now Croatia and a former fellow at Harvard Medical School who was the foundation’s science adviser. Mr. Nikolic and Mr. Gates frequently traveled and socialized together.

Ms. Walker, who had remained in close touch with Mr. Epstein, introduced him to Mr. Nikolic, and the men became friendly.

Mr. Epstein and Mr. Gates first met face to face on the evening of Jan. 31, 2011, at Mr. Epstein’s townhouse on the Upper East Side. They were joined by Dr. Eva Andersson-Dubin, a former Miss Sweden whom Mr. Epstein had once dated, and her 15-year-old daughter. (Dr. Andersson-Dubin’s husband, the hedge fund billionaire Glenn Dubin, was a friend and business associate of Mr. Epstein’s. The Dubins declined to comment.)

The gathering started at 8 and lasted several hours, according to Ms. Arnold, Mr. Gates’s spokeswoman. Mr. Epstein subsequently boasted about the meeting in emails to friends and associates. “Bill’s great,” he wrote in one, reviewed by The Times.

“I didn’t go to New Mexico or Florida or Palm Beach or any of that,” claims Gates. “There were people around him who were saying, hey, if you want to raise money for global health and get more philanthropy, he knows a lot of rich people.”

And it looks like Gates was one of Epstein’s “rich people.” According to the report, Gates donated $2 million to MIT’s Media Lab, which university officials described as having been “directed” by Epstein.

According to Arnold, Gates’ spokeswoman, “Over time, Gates and his team realized Epstein’s capabilities and ideas were not legitimate and all contact with Epstein was discontinued.”

Perhaps ‘Gates and his team’ should have steered clear of the known pedophile in the first place?

*  *  *

More Gates answers, via Bloomberg:

Bill Gates is in favor of raising some taxes, but says some proposals seem to go too far. “Taxes are an important issue. Government has to do more -health costs, pandemic recovery, climate investments, foreign aid generosity… So I have pushed for some higher taxes. I have disagreed with some proposals that seem to go too far,” the billionaire said Friday during an “Ask Me Anything” Q&A session on Reddit. The commentary follows a recent proposed wealth tax from Senator Elizabeth Warren that called for a 2% annual tax on households and trusts valued at between $50 million and $1 billion. All net worth over $1 billion would be taxed at 3%. The Microsoft co-founder did not specifically mention any tax proposals during his Q&A. Gates, who is the third wealthiest person in the world according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, also said a higher estate tax can be an effective tool for revenue and avoiding dynastic wealth.

More key quotes:

  • On crypto mining:
    • “I have a lot of issues with anonymous money transfer compared to attributed systems where you can dispute and reverse transactions and make sure taxes are paid. The electricity use is just one issue. We do need digital money but without that overhead.”
  • On universal basic income:
    • “Today we provide income to people who are disabled in many countries. The question is, can we afford to do this for everyone. We are getting richer as we innovate but I question if we are rich enough to discourage able people from working. Over time we have been more generous and we will be more generous. The discussion on this is very interesting but it does come down to numbers…”
  • On misinformation, disinformation and fake news:
    • “Some false information is more interesting than the truth so digital channels seem to magnify echo chambers with bad facts. I haven’t seen as much creativity on how we solve this as we need.”
  • On climate denial:
    • “The damage in the past was huge. Now the oil companies have stopped funding these things so I think climate denial will go down. There are issues about how we go about reducing emissions but I hope all young people agree that is a critical goal.”
  • If nothing is done about climate change:
    • “It gets worse over time and natural ecosystems go away. The migration away from the unlivable areas around the equator will be massive. We won’t be able to support a large population if it gets a lot warmer.”
  • On reaching net zero emissions by 2050:
    • “There’s more public support for taking big steps to avoid a climate disaster than ever before. It’s inspiring to see governments and companies around the world set ambitious goals for reducing emissions. The world’s power to invent makes me optimistic.”


Friday, March 19, 2021

This Information Could Destroy the COVID Hoax Forever (12 Q & A’s)


This Information Could Destroy the COVID Hoax Forever

Mar 16, 2021

The Alex Jones Show

This Information Could Destroy the COVID Hoax Forever

Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting vaccinated:

●”If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?”

Government: “NO”

●”If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to work like normal?

Government: “NO”

●”If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?”

Government: “Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.”

●”If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?”

Government: “NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.”

●”If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?”

Government: “No one knows. All Covid “vaccines” are still in the experimental stage.”

● “If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?”

Government: “NO”

● “If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we hug each other again?”

Government: “NO”

● “So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?”

Government: “Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.”

●”Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?”

Government: “NO”

●”If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate), why should I get vaccinated?”

Government: “To protect others.”

●”So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in contact with?”

Government: “NO”

● “If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects (still unknown) or die from the vaccine will I (or my family) be compensated from the vaccine manufacture or the Government?”

Government: “NO – the government and vaccine manufacturer’s have 100% zero liability regarding this experimental drug”

So to summarize, the Covid19 “vaccine”…

Does not provide immunity

Does not eliminate the virus

Does not prevent death

Does not guarantee you won’t get it

Does not stop you from passing it on to others

Does not eliminate the need for travel bans

Does not eliminate the need for business closures

Does not eliminate the need for lockdowns!!!

breakdown by Irishman1776


On The Psychology Of The Conspiracy Denier

(Tim Foyle, Reporting For Beauty) Why is it that otherwise perfectly intelligent, thoughtful and rationally minded people baulk at the suggestion that sociopaths are conspiring to manipulate and deceive them? And why will they defend this ill-founded position with such vehemence?


Pfizer CEO: "It will be terrible" if COVID-19 vaccine prices limit access

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla told "Axios on HBO" that it "will be terrible for society" if the price of coronavirus vaccines ever prohibits some people from taking them.


Thursday, March 18, 2021

Dark Journalist – Catherine Austin Fitts: World in Crisis!



Catherine Austin Fitts joins Dark Journalist to discuss the ongoing Global Financial Coup d’État, as established by the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s Statement 56 (FASB 56).

“FASB 56 basically said, ‘We’re going to privatize the Treasury to an invisible committee that we don’t know who that is and they’re going to be able to create secret books by a process which is secret.’

“So a group of secret people with a secret process, creating secret books – and now, with the election fraud and the new Election Act, basically, what we’re saying is, ‘The electorate doesn’t get to vote on who runs the Treasury. The Treasury has now gone private.'”

She notes how a group of Democrats recently called for Biden to relinquish the nuclear codes and to turn them over to a committee and she implies this had nothing to do with Biden’s advancing dementia. It has to do with the Biden Administration’s agenda to dismantle the US.

“FASB 56 is the privatization of the Treasury. Turning over the nuclear codes is the privatization of the military. Remember, if you want to come out with a global reserve currency system, you need the military to be controlled globally.

“In the meantime, we’re watching central bankers, people from the New York Fed or from BlackRock being moved into different positions all across the Administration. So, it looks to me, what’s happening is a consolidation of the Financial Coup, because this balance of power, between the Electorate and the private bankers is now coming to an end and the private bankers are moving in and taking over everything and ‘Bye-bye, Electorate.’

In other words, welcome to the China Model. Especially as China owns much of the US debt.

She continues, “I think the question is, are we also looking at a cut and run, because the debt is now skyrocketing, it’s almost approaching $30 trillion and the undocumentable adjustments are skyrocketing.”

Daniel Liszt says, “They’re looking to implode the United States,” and Catherine agrees, “That’s what it looks like. But remember, when you implode the United States, you want to blame it on the people you just stole the money from. So, I don’t want to give Daniel Liszt back his $150,000 of undocumentable adjustments that I’ve stolen or if you look at a family of 4, we’re now approaching over half a million per family. So, you don’t want to explain to him, ‘Oh, we stole the money and we’re sticking the debt to you.’ You don’t want to be accountable for that, you want to stick the blame to him.

“So, what’s the game? I don’t know what the game is but some of the possibilities are that you want the states to take action to secede, because you can say, ‘Well, you know, you seceded, so there’s no Social Security, don’t blame us.

“Now, the Magic Virus is helping, because you get these articles that are saying, ‘Oh, there won’t be enough money in Social Security because of COVID-19.’ It’s the Magic Virus, it wipes out all the contingencies of the financial coup.

“I’ve never seen an economic warfare scenario such as we’ve been in since March 2020…We’re talking about the complete theft of all private equity and assets in the world. They’re serious. When Klaus Schwab says, ‘It’s 2030, you have no assets and you will be happy,’ he’s serious.

“That’s why, when people ask me where they should put their money, I say, ‘You should put your money into financing an army to stop this.’

Contributed by Alexandra Bruce



‘Vaccine Secrets’: What Parents Should Know Before They Vaccinate Their Kids



When it comes to vaccines, the prevailing narrative is that they are a modern miracle.

But what if that isn’t true? What if vaccines are potentially more dangerous to some people than the diseases they were designed to prevent?

“Vaccine Secrets,” an animated video, explores these questions and more. The video was created by parents who followed the rules. They vaccinated their children according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s schedule.

These parents thought they were doing the right thing, that they were protecting their children. Sadly, they learned they had done just the opposite.

As this video points out, some children can withstand the mercury, aluminum and other industrial chemicals that are in vaccines — but others can’t.

“Vaccine Secrets” fact checks the many statements used to convince parents that vaccines are safe and effective, and dispels many of the myths perpetuated about vaccines, including:

Children’s Health Defense provides links to sources backing up all of the facts outlined in the video.

Watch “Vaccine Secrets’:

The post ‘Vaccine Secrets’: What Parents Should Know Before They Vaccinate Their Kids appeared first on Children's Health Defense.


Journalists, Illustrating How They Operate, Yesterday Spread a Significant Lie All Over Twitter

Hunter Biden (L) and then-Vice President Joe Biden speak on stage at Organization of American States on April 12, 2016 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Teresa Kroeger/Getty Images for World Food Program USA)

Journalists with the largest and most influential media outlets disseminated an outright and quite significant lie on Tuesday to hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions, on Twitter. While some of them were shamed into acknowledging the falsity of their claim, many refused to, causing it to continue to spread up until this very moment. It is well worth examining how they function because this is how they deceive the public again and again, and it is why public trust in their pronouncements has justifiably plummeted.

The lie they told involved claims of Russian involvement in the procurement of Hunter Biden’s laptop. In the weeks leading up to the 2020 election, The New York Post obtained that laptop and published a series of articles about the Biden family’s business dealings in Ukraine, China and elsewhere. In response, Twitter banned the posting of any links to that reporting and locked The Post out of its Twitter account for close to two weeks, while Facebook, through a long-time Democratic operative, announced that it would algorithmically suppress the reporting.

Subscribe now

The excuse used by those social media companies for censoring this reporting was the same invoked by media outlets to justify their refusal to report the contents of these documents: namely, that the materials were “Russian disinformation.” That claim of “Russian disinformation” was concocted by a group of several dozen former CIA officials and other operatives of the intelligence community devoted to defeating Trump. Immediately after The Post published its first story about Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine that traded on his influence with his father, these career spies and propagandists, led by Obama CIA Director and serial liar John Brennan, published a letter asserting that the appearance of these Biden documents “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

News outlets uncritically hyped this claim as fact even though these security state operatives themselves admitted: “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails…are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.” Even though this claim came from trained liars who, with uncharacteristic candor, acknowledged that they did not “have evidence” for their claim, media outlets uncritically ratified this assertion.

This was a topic I discussed extensively in October when I announced my resignation from The Intercept after senior editors — for the first time in seven years — violated the contractual prohibition on editorial interference in my journalism by demanding I significantly alter my reporting about these documents by removing the sections that reflected negatively on Biden. What I found particularly galling about their pretense that they have such high-level and rigorous editorial standards — standards they claimed, for the first time ever, that my article failed to meet — was that a mere week prior to their censorship of my article, they published an article by a different journalist which, at a media outlet we created with the explicit purpose of treating government claims with skepticism, instead treated the CIA’s claims of “Russian disinformation” as fact. Even worse, when they quoted the CIA’s letter, they omitted the part where even those intelligence agents acknowledged that they had no evidence for their assertion. From The Intercept on October 21:

Their latest falsehood once again involves Biden, Ukraine, and a laptop mysteriously discovered in a computer repair shop and passed to the New York Post, thanks to Trump crony Rudy Giuliani….. The U.S. intelligence community had previously warned the White House that Giuliani has been the target of a Russian intelligence operation to disseminate disinformation about Biden, and the FBI has been investigating whether the strange story about the Biden laptop is part of a Russian disinformation campaign. This week, a group of former intelligence officials issued a letter saying that the Giuliani laptop story has the classic trademarks of Russian disinformation.

Oh my, marvel at those extremely rigorous editorial standards: regurgitating serious accusations from ex-CIA operatives without bothering to note that they were unaccompanied by evidence and that even those agents admitted they had none. But, as they usually do these days, The Intercept had plenty of company in the corporate media.

That those materials were “Russian disinformation” became so reflexively accepted by the U.S. media that it became the principal excuse to ignore and even censor the reporting, and it also helpfully handed the Biden campaign an easy excuse to avoid answering any questions about what the documents revealed. “I think we need to be very, very clear that what he's doing here is amplifying Russian misinformation," said Biden Deputy Campaign Manager Kate Bedingfield when asked about the prospect that Trump would raise the Biden emails at the debate. From the CIA’s lips to the mouths of corporate journalists into the hands of the Biden campaign.

As the U.S. media disseminated this “disinformation” tale, nobody — including the Bidens — has ever claimed let alone demonstrated that a single document was anything other than genuine — something that would be exceedingly easy to do if the documents were fraudulent. "The Biden team has rejected some of the claims made in the NY Post articles, but has not disputed the authenticity of the [laptop] files upon which they were based,” acknowledged The New York Times. Ample evidence corroborates that the documents are genuine.

As for the claims of Russian involvement in the laptop story, there was never any evidence for it: none. The CIA operatives who invented that storyline acknowledged that. The week that tale emerged, The New York Times reported that “no concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation” and the paper said even the FBI has “acknowledged that it had not found any Russian disinformation on the laptop.” The Washington Post published an op-ed by Russia fanatic Thomas Rid who candidly pronounced: “We must treat the Hunter Biden leaks as if they were a foreign intelligence operation — even if they probably aren't." And the only time the U.S. Government has ever spoken on this question was when the Director of National Intelligence stated: “Hunter Biden's laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign."

These documents raised important questions about the presidential frontrunner’s knowledge of or participation in his family members’ attempt to profit off of their association with him, questions implicating his integrity, ethics and honesty. Yet those documents were suppressed by a gigantic fraud, perpetrated by the CIA and their media allies, which claimed that the documents were forged and that they came from Russia.

That is the critical context for the lie spread yesterday by numerous mainstream journalists. On Tuesday morning, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declassified a short 12-page report entitled “Foreign Threats to the U.S. 2020 Elections.”

It reviewed the actions of numerous countries with regard to the 2020 election. The intelligence community claimed — without presenting any evidence whatsoever — that “Russian President Putin authorized…influence operations aimed at denigrating President Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting former President Trump, undermining public confidence in the electoral process, and exacerbating sociopolitical divisions in the U.S.” The New York Times’ largely credulous article about this report contained this admission, one you would think (or, rather, hope) would matter to journalists: “The declassified report did not explain how the intelligence community had reached its conclusions about Russian operations during the 2020 election.”

Despite that glaring omission, media outlets predictably treated the evidence-free assertions from the security state as fact. “Vladimir Putin did it again,” trumpeted Mother Jones’ David Corn without an iota of skepticism. CNN’s Marshall Cohen actually said this:

Think about that: to a CNN reporter, evidence-free assertions from the U.S. security state are tantamount to “confirmation.” That they really do think this way is nothing short of chilling. But that is the standard liberal media posture of harboring reverence for the U.S. intelligence community and treating its every utterance as Truth without the need for any corroborating evidence. It is one of their defining attributes.

But in this case, many of them went far beyond mere regurgitation of CIA claims. Well beyond it: here, they fabricated a claim that report also demonstrated that the Hunter Biden laptop materials were — as they claimed before the election — engineered by Russia. In reality, the report did not even mention the Hunter Biden laptop materials or allude to it, let alone claim that it was produced by the Kremlin, let alone supply evidence that it constituted “Russian disinformation.” But no matter: numerous journalists united to spread the false claim far and wide that the report confirmed this storyline.

The first journalist to publish the falsehood was Patrick Tucker, an editor at the journal Defense One. The tweet quickly went viral as liberals clicked “retweet” and “like” so fast that at least several of them likely suffered digital cartilage damage or at least a mild sprain:

The claim that this report corroborated Russian involvement in the Hunter laptop story picked up significant steam when MSNBC host Chris Hayes endorsed it to his 2.3 million followers:

From there, the claim was further spread by Hayes’ NBC News colleague Ben Collins, who — ironically — works in what the network calls the “disinformation unit,” combatting the spread of disinformation (by which Collins means tattling on 4Chan teenagers and Facebook boomers, while never challenging the lies of real power centers such as those from the intelligence community; those lies are ones he amplifies):

With this MSNBC host and the NBC disinformation agent on board, it was off to the races. Journalists from across the corporate media sphere spread this lie over and over. Here was CNN’s Asha Rangappa:

Perhaps the most embarrassing example was from S.V. Daté, the White House correspondent of HuffPost which, just last week, had dozens of its reporters laid off perhaps because, while they have numerous talented reporters, this is the sort of thing they routinely do, causing them to lose trust among the public. Daté did not just repeat the lie but used it to mock those who actually did the reporting on these documents (note that the section he underlined in red says nothing about the Hunter Biden documents, nor does it say anything about Russia other than it “amplified” various news stories):

As this false claim went massively viral, conservative journalists — and only they — began vocally objecting that the report made no mention whatsoever of the Hunter Biden laptop, let alone supplied proof for this claim. That is because, with a few noble exceptions (such as The Washington Post’s media critic Erik Wemple), liberal journalists at corporate outlets will eagerly endorse but never denounce or correct each other’s falsehoods. For that reason, if you confine yourself to the liberal corporate media bubble, and refuse to follow conservative journalists as well, you will be propagandized and deceived.

Hayes, to his credit, was one of the only journalists who helped spread this falsehood and then quickly retracted it. He first acknowledged that, upon reading the report, it did not appear that it actually made any reference to the Hunter laptop, and then announced he would delete his original tweet, conceding that the original claim was false. Note how the original false claims go mega-viral, while the tweets which subsequently acknowledge their falsity are seen by very few people:

With one of his earliest boosters having jumped ship, Tucker himself, the originator of this lie, first began backtracking while vowing he would never delete the tweet, only to then relent and delete it, acknowledging its falsity. Again compare the meager audience that learns of the backtracking and acknowledgment of falsity compared to the huge number exposed to the original false claim:

Thanks to multiple journalists with large platforms spreading Tucker’s original false tweet, it received thousands upon thousands of likes and re-tweets. So, too, did the tweets of other journalists promoting that false claim, such as the one from HuffPost’s White House Correspondent, and this one from one of David Brock’s goons specifically claiming that the security state’s evidence-free report somehow proves that my pre-election reporting on it was wrong. Yet Tucker’s announcement that he was deleting his tweet on the ground that the report does not make “explicit reference to the Hunter Biden laptop story” has a grand total of three retweets.

Indeed, other than Hayes, it is difficult to find a journalist who acknowledged that what they spread was a lie. Both CNN’s Rangappa and NBC News’ Collins simply allowed the tweet to quietly disappear from their timeline when Tucker finally deleted his, saying nothing to the thousands or tens of thousands of people they misled. Meanwhile, the tweet from HuffPost’s Daté is still up a full twenty-four hours after the key journalists who spread this have acknowledged it was false.

Do you see how they behave? Take a look. Prior to the election, out of desperation to ensure that Biden won, they censored and maligned this reporting by mindlessly endorsing an assertion from life-long CIA operatives that never had any evidence: ignore these documents; they are Russian disinformation. They not only invoked that claim to justify ignoring the story but also to successfully agitate for its censorship by Twitter and Facebook. So they spent weeks spreading an utter lie in order to help the candidate that they favored win the election. Remember, these are journalists doing that.

Then, yesterday, the intelligence community issued a report that does not even purport to contain any evidence: just assertions. And they all jumped to treat it as gospel: no questioning of it, no skepticism, no demands to see evidence for it, not even any notation that no evidence was provided. They just instantly enshrined claims from the CIA and NSA as Truth. How can you possibly be a journalist with even minimal knowledge of what these agencies do and look in the mirror as you do this?

But so much worse, in this case, they just outright lied about what the report said — just fabricated assertions that the report did not even allude to, in order to declare their lies from last October to be vindicated. Even if this report had asserted that the Hunter Biden laptop materials were manufactured by the Kremlin, that would prove nothing. Evidence-free assertions from the U.S. intelligence community merit skepticism, not blind faith — especially from people calling themselves journalists.

But the report did not even claim that. And when some of them realized this, they did virtually nothing to rectify the severe disinformation they had spent the day spreading. These are the people who claim to be so profoundly opposed to conspiracy theories and devoted to combating “disinformation”; as usual, they are the ones who spread disinformation most recklessly and frequently.

The fact that the false tweet from HuffPost’s White House correspondent is still up is quite revealing, given that that outlet just had to lay off a significant portion of its staff. As newly arrived Substack writer Michael Tracey wrote in his first article on this platform (headlined: “Why Journalists Hate Substack”), journalists are very good at lamenting when their outlets are forced to lay off journalists but very poor at examining whether the content their outlet is producing may be part of why it is failing:

So when you see another round of layoffs, followed by another round of exasperated Twitter lamentation about how horrible the industry is, you have to wonder if these rituals ultimately function as an excuse for journalists to forgo any kind of real self-examination. For instance, why it is that the media organizations they inhabit always seem to be in a constant state of free-fall? Sure, there are economic factors at play that the journalists themselves cannot control. But it would seem to behoove these journalists to maybe spend a little bit less time complaining in the abstract about the depredations of “the industry”—as though they are its hapless, beleaguered casualties—and a little bit more time analyzing whether they have contributed to the indisputable reality that huge cross-sections of the public distrust and despise the media.

There are multiple potential explanations for this dynamic worth considering. Maybe it’s the tedious hyper-partisanship and weirdly outdated content aggregation tactics that much of the online media still employs. Maybe it’s the constant five-alarm-fire tone and incessant hyping of overblown threats that was characteristic of the Trump years. Maybe it’s some combination of all these and more—but you won’t see many axed journalists offering up any kind of critical introspection, because when the layoffs arrive it can never have anything to do with their own ideological myopia or other shortcomings.

Indeed, when anyone, including journalists, loses their job, it is lamentable. But when one witnesses behavior like what these journalists did yesterday, the only confounding part of the collapse of this part of the media industry is that it is not happening even more quickly and severely.


The Biggest Covid Heretic Strikes Back



Shop all books by Tom Woods

From the Tom Woods Letter:

From the standpoint of what we laughingly call our “public health” establishment, the most dangerous heretic of 2020 was Scott Atlas.

Atlas, who served in the White House during 2020 as a public health adviser on matters related to COVID-19, recently spoke to a group of students at Stanford University about his experience.

Atlas was treated absurdly by his fellow academics and (of course) by the media, who accused him of all kinds of wickedness because he dissented from the lockdown consensus.

He reviewed all the key points from the past year.

First, in order to explain away the clear failures of lockdowns and other alleged mitigation measures, the lockdowners have tried to pretend that Americans weren’t really all that locked down after all, and that in any case Americans didn’t really change their behavior all that much.

Atlas threw cold water on both of those claims:

Here’s the unacknowledged reality: almost all states and major cities, with a handful of exceptions, have implemented severe restrictions for many months, including closures of businesses and in-person school, mobility restrictions and curfews, quarantines, limits on group gatherings, and mask mandates dating back to at least the summer.

And let’s clear up the myths about the behavior of Americans – social mobility tracking of Americans and data from Gallup, YouGov, the COVID-19 Consortium, and the CDC have shown significant reductions of movement as well as a consistently high percentage of mask wearing since the late summer, similar to Western European countries and approaching those in Asia.

He then proceeded to lay out some of the costs of lockdown, of which I offer a sample here:

A recent study confirms that up to 78% of cancers were never detected due to missed screening over three months. If one extrapolates to the entire country, up to a million new cases or more over nine months will have gone undetected. That health disaster adds to missed critical surgeries, chemotherapy, organ transplants, presentations of pediatric illnesses, heart attack and stroke patients too afraid to call emergency services, and others, all well documented.

Beyond hospital care, CDC reported four-fold increases in depression, three-fold increases in anxiety symptoms, and a doubling of suicidal ideation, particularly among young adults  college age – after the first few months of lockdowns, echoing the AMA reports of drug overdoses and suicides. An explosion of insurance claims for these psychological harms in children just verified this, doubling nationally since last year; and in the strictly locked down Northeast, there was a more than 300% increase of teenagers visiting doctors for self-harm.

Domestic abuse and child abuse have been skyrocketing due to the isolation and specifically to the loss of jobs, particularly in the strictest lockdowns.

Was anybody even bothering to consider these effects?

That, said Atlas, was why someone like him needed to be part of the discussion:

To manage such a crisis, shouldn’t policymakers objectively consider both the virus harms and the totality of impact of policies? That’s the importance of health policy experts – my field – with a broader scope of expertise than that of epidemiologists and basic scientists. And that’s exactly why I was called to the White House – there were zero health policy scholars on the Task Force; no one with a medical background who also considered the impacts of the policies was advising the White House. 

He also spoke about the policy of universal masking:

Regarding universal masks: 38 states have implemented general-population mask mandates, most since at least the summer, with almost all the rest having mandates in their major cities. Widespread, general-population mask usage has shown little empirical utility for stopping cases, even though that evidence has been censored by Twitter and Amazon. Widespread mask usage showed only minimal impact in Denmark’s randomized controlled study. Those are facts. And facts matter.

I posted a list where mask mandates empirically failed to stop cases, along with direct quotes, without any edit, from WHO, CDC, and Oxford University. That was censored by Twitter. And I stated numerous times that it would be irrational to wear a mask “when alone riding a bicycle outside, when driving your own car alone, or when walking in the desert alone.” I stand by those words.

Those who charge that it is unethical, even dangerous, to question broad population mask mandates must not realize that several of the world’s top infectious disease scientists and major public health organizations explicitly question the efficacy of general population masks. The public needs to know the truth.

For instance, Jefferson and Heneghan of University of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine wrote: “It would appear that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.” Oxford’s renowned epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta said there is no need for masks unless one is elderly or high risk. Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya stated “mask mandates are not supported by the scientific data … there is no scientific evidence that mask mandates work to slow the spread of the disease.”

Throughout this pandemic until December, the WHO’s “Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19” stated: “At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.” In December, the WHO changed their wording to today’s “At present there is only limited and inconsistent scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2.”

The CDC, in a review of influenza pandemics, “did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.” And until the WHO removed it on October 21, 2020 (almost immediately after Twitter censored my tweet highlighting the WHO quote), the WHO had written, “At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.”

Atlas then slammed the academic community, particularly at Stanford (his home institution), which conducted itself appallingly in his case.

It’s a great summary of the insanity.

Meanwhile, this week I’m heading to the Mises Institute, which has been excellent on COVID and the lockdowns, for their Austrian Economics Research Conference.

If you’re at the Diamond level or above in my Supporting Listeners program, I will be mailing you a gift from there.

And I’ll be writing my daily dispatches from there, too.

Stay sane.

The post The Biggest Covid Heretic Strikes Back appeared first on LewRockwell.


Valid Claims That Natural Remedies Prevent, Treat, or Cure Covid-19 Are Being Censored by the FDA



Regarding Dr. Joe Mercola’s statements, re-produced at, that a number of products at do treat, prevent and cure COVID-19, it needs to be said that such claims are permissible under the law as long as brand names are not identified.  Dr. Mercola made a general blanket statement.  No brands were mentioned.

That the FDA lists on its fraudulent COVID-19 products page as well the Center For Science In The Public Interest issues a veiled threat to remove Mercola’s website where free scientific reports that detail the benefits of vitamins in protecting against all viral infections are posted, represents egregious and unjustified violations of the First Amendment.

There IS current scientific literature that conclusively asserts certain vitamins and minerals, namely vitamin D, zinc, vitamin C, vitamin A, selenium, are beneficial in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 and that such information is covered by the first amendment of free speech that Dr. Mercola accurately cites.

The public may be fearful, but not stupid

That the FDA demonizes and censors comes at a time when there are no proven vaccines or medicines to treat COVID-19, is unconscionable.  The public is not stupid.  Millions of Americans have opted to use dietary supplements to boost their immunity.

Drugs/vaccines vs natural remedies

Here we now have the greatest vaccine/drug vs dietary supplement trial ever conceived. Contrary to the experience with vaccines, there have been no reported deaths or serious side effects from dietary supplement use during this COVID-19 crisis.

Supplement or drug?

That any brand of dietary supplement prevents, treats or cures any infectious disease, or any disease for that matter, is prohibited by FDA regulations, as such claims can only be made for drugs.  A supplement cannot be a drug and a supplement at the same time.  A dietary supplement that prevents, treats or cures any disease is categorically a drug.  If vitamin D were classified as a drug it would be too expensive for most Americans to purchase.

Vitamin claims for nutrient deficiency diseases

So, is vitamin C a drug because it prevents and cures scurvy (weak blood capillaries that result in bleeding)?  Is vitamin D a drug because it prevents and cures rickets (bone softening)?  Is vitamin B1 a drug because it prevents symptoms of beriberi (autonomic nervous system), which by the way mimics the symptoms of COVID-19?  Is zinc a drug because it also prevents the symptoms of COVID-19 and inhibits polymerase, the enzyme that facilitates the replication of viruses?  Are herbals like resveratrol and quercetin drugs for the same reasons?

Vaccines don’t work without zinc

By the way, vaccines simply are not effective unless the trace mineral zinc is adequate in a human being.  The American diet is woefully low in zinc (average intake 10 milligrams/day, and only about 2 milligrams are absorbed due to low stomach acid levels, particularly in older Americans).

Zinc facilitates the production of T-memory cells in the thymus gland that confer long-term immunity to any infectious disease.  It is T-cells, not antibodies, that produce immunity against COVID-19.  In fact, zinc may universally protect against all infectious disease because of this and replace all vaccines.

Leave them to die

It is not in the public’s best interest to ban the spread of information that essential nutrients prevent, treat or cure certain dietary deficiency diseases and their accompanying symptoms.  In practice, current public policy is, if there is no FDA-licensed vaccine, let Americans die.

Compassionate care

A dietary supplement that does go through the New Drug Application process and is proven by adequate science (controlled human studies) may receive licensure from the FDA for the purposes it was used for in a published peer-reviewed study.  However, most drugs are allowed to be prescribed for off-label claims given they have been proven safe and effective for another condition, at least under compassionate care guidelines (when lives are threatened and all other treatments have been exhausted).  Why not dietary supplements?

Saying COVID-19 vaccines are safe is in violation of FDA regulations

The FDA is violating their own rules now by allowing vaccine makers to say their products are safe when studies to prove that are not completed yet.  In fact, there is no safety study (mortality) underway for any COVID-19 vaccines.  There are only studies to prove these vaccines reduce symptoms of mild COVID-19 by 50%.

Studies to prove these vaccines reduce transmission or reduce fatality rates are not currently in play and would take a few years to be completed.  Efforts to mandate vaccination by employers with an experimental unproven vaccine is medical mayhem.  Ditto for travel passes that validate vaccination.  How can travel passes ensure transmission will not occur if that isn’t being tested?

Lack of informed consent

Public health authorities said they expect 4 of the coronavirus vaccine trials now underway to fail.  Candidates for vaccination are not being informed of this.

Vaccine makers and public health officials are riding roughshod over existing regulations.  In fact, informed consent/refusal is not taking place even though it is required by US Code, the Nuremberg Code and the Helsinki Agreement.  There are alternatives to vaccines which must be listed in a consent form, namely the above-mentioned nutrients.

The sun proves vitamin D works

The very fact that influenza and coronavirus infections are seasonal (winter) strongly suggests sunshine vitamin D is a natural preventive against respiratory diseases.  In lieu of sunlight/skin exposure, vitamin D pills suffice to prevent or even treat infectious disease.  Modern medicine overlooks the seasonality of infectious disease.

COVID-19 vaccines are not 95% effective

The claim that these vaccines are 95% effective is categorically specious.  Any vaccine cannot benefit people more than the infection rate.  Less than 30 million cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed by PCR or other testing, with many false positives in that number.  As of March 15, 2021, 29.5 million reported cases of COVID-19, divided by 325 million Americans = 9% infection rate (though many others have been infected, experience symptoms, but have not been confirmed by lab testing).

Therefore, a vaccine that is 100% effective can only benefit ~9% of those inoculated who happen to be infected during the time of the vaccination.

Among that 9% who have lab confirmed COVID-19, more than 50% have a false positive test, and many of these are without symptoms, so the infection rate is overstated.   These patients may have the flu, which health authorities disingenuously claim has vanished.  The fact that the flu is said to have vanished this season suggests flu cases have been re-categorized as COVID-19.  The public appears to be having the wool pulled over their eyes.

Within the 9% who are infected there is a 95% reduction in mild symptoms versus individuals who receive a placebo.  So, 91% must needlessly be vaccinated to spare 9% from infection, which may be an invalid diagnosis anyway.

As of this date there have been 535,000 COVID-19 related (but not necessarily COVID-19 caused) deaths in the US.  That a person dies with a lab confirmed cases of COVID-19 does not prove that the person died of COVID-19, only that they died with COVID-19.

About 94% of these COVID-19 deaths have largely occurred among the frail elderly who have co-morbid diseases and were on their deathbed when they tested positive for COVID-19.  This means only 6% of deaths were COVID-19 only.  So only 6% of the 535,000 COVID-19 deaths = 32,100 deaths may be from COVID-19 alone; 32,100 COVID-19 associated deaths in a population of 325,000,000 = a death rate of 0.000098%, or almost 10 in 100,000.  So, if vaccines prevented all deaths, 99,990 people would have to be vaccinated to prevent 10 deaths.  Based upon the data, the vaccines cannot be more than 0.000098% effective at reducing mortality in the population at large, not 0.95%.

The post Valid Claims That Natural Remedies Prevent, Treat, or Cure Covid-19 Are Being Censored by the FDA appeared first on LewRockwell.


Trump Chastises WashPo For Hoax Report After Paper Corrects Story Alleging Ex-President Pressured Georgia Election Official



Donald Trump has hit back at the Washington Post after it corrected an article claiming that the former US president tried to strongarm a Georgia official, criticizing the report as an example of biased journalism.

The now-discredited story, published in January, alleged that Trump had instructed the state’s top elections investigator to “find the fraud” that led to Democrat Joe Biden’s election victory, and that she would be a “national hero” if she did. But on Monday, the paper issued a lengthy correction after an audio recording of the conversation showed that Trump said no such things. The Post admitted that it had “misquoted” Trump based on “information provided by a source.”

Responding to WaPo’s correction, Trump said that, while he “appreciated” that the error had been fixed, the story had been a “hoax” from the start.

INBOX: Former President Donald Trump has thoughts on the Washington Post correction

— Ben Jacobs (@Bencjacobs) March 15, 2021

“A strong democracy requires a fair and honest press. This latest media travesty underscores that legacy media outlets should be regarded as political entities–not journalistic enterprises,” the former US president said in a statement.

He further claimed that “errors, omissions, mistakes and outright lies” by “establishment media” always target himself and other Republicans, while stories that are damaging to Democrats are “buried” or delayed until they are deemed harmless.

Doubling down on accusations that he made after the November election, Trump added that he believed that a “strong investigation” into alleged voting irregularities in Fulton County, Georgia would “totally change the course of the presidential election” in the state.

Although Trump and his allies have insisted that the presidential contest was rife with fraud, the allegations have not held up well in court, with numerous cases being dismissed.

Reprinted from RT News.

The post Trump Chastises WashPo For Hoax Report After Paper Corrects Story Alleging Ex-President Pressured Georgia Election Official appeared first on LewRockwell.