Tag: covid-19

CDC Officials Who Spread Misinformation Apologized to Source of False Data but Not to Public

U.S. health officials who spread inflated COVID-19 child death data in public meetings apologized to the source of the false data but not to the public, newly obtained emails show.

Drs. Katherine Fleming-Dutra and Sara Oliver, with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), offered the false data in 2022 while U.S. officials weighed granting emergency authorization to COVID-19 vaccines for children as young as 6 months.

The study they cited for the data was published ahead of peer review by a group comprised primarily of British authors. The study was corrected after the public meetings.

Emails obtained by The Epoch Times showed that Fleming-Dutra and Oliver were alerted that they had spread misinformation. Neither the officials nor the CDC have informed the public of the false information. Newly obtained emails showed the officials apologized to Seth Flaxman, one of the study’s authors, and even offered to see whether the study could be published in the CDC’s quasi-journal.

“I feel … that we owe you an apology,” Oliver wrote to Flaxman on June 27, about 10 days after she and Fleming-Dutra falsely said there had been at least 1,433 deaths primarily attributed to COVID-19 in America among those 19 and younger. “We draw the attention of a variety of individuals with the ACIP meetings, and apologize that you got caught in it this time.”

“I am also sorry that you got pulled into the attention around the VRBPAC and ACIP meetings,” Fleming-Dutra added. She had presented the data to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, which advises the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which advises the CDC.

Fleming-Dutra, Oliver, and Flaxman did not respond to requests for comment.

Keep reading

Doctors in USA admit they killed Patients during the Pandemic by putting them on Ventilators

In a jaw-dropping article published by The Wall Street Journal – ‘Hospitals Retreat From Early Covid Treatment and Return to Basics’ – physicians admit to ventilating patients who did not need it as a step in their protocol – get this – not as a treatment that was likely to benefit the patient, but rather as a fruitless and callous way of attempting to stop the spread of covid-19.

Last spring, with less known about the disease, doctors often pre-emptively put patients on ventilators or gave powerful sedatives largely abandoned in recent years. The aim was to save the seriously ill and protect hospital staff from Covid-19.

Now hospital treatment for the most critically ill looks more like it did before the pandemic. Doctors hold off longer before placing patients on ventilators. Patients get less powerful sedatives, with doctors checking more frequently to see if they can halt the drugs entirely and dialling back how much air ventilators push into patients’ lungs with each breath.

“We were intubating sick patients very early. Not for the patient’s benefit, but to control the epidemic and to save other patients,” Dr. Iwashyna said “That felt awful.”

Yes, euthanising humans is illegal. Especially for the benefit of other patients. It should feel awful.

Last spring, doctors put patients on ventilators partly to limit contagion at a time when it was less clear how the virus spread when protective masks and gowns were in short supply. Doctors could have employed other kinds of breathing support devices that don’t require risky sedation, but early reports suggested patients using them could spray dangerous amounts of virus into the air, said Theodore Iwashyna, a critical-care physician at University of Michigan and Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals in Ann Arbor, Mich.

Subsequent research found the alternative devices to ventilators, such as delivering oxygen through nasal tubes, weren’t as risky to caretakers as believed. Doctors also gained experience with covid-19 patients, learning to spot signs of who might suddenly turn seriously ill, some said.

The WSJ article describes a study conducted that now allows doctors to predict who needs a ventilator and who does not:

It found more doctors now follow the pre-pandemic protocols, which have reduced the number of deaths and shortened the time patients spend on ventilators, HCA’s chief medical officer said.

Before the pandemic, between about 30% to more than 40% of ventilator patients died, according to research. Numbers were sharply higher in the pandemic’s early hot spot in Wuhan, China. As the pandemic grew, hospitals in the US reported death rates in some cases of about 50% for ventilated covid-19 patients.

Keep reading

Vatican investigating ‘sex party’ in cathedral

The Catholic Church is investigating allegations of a “sex party” that took place at St. Mary’s Cathedral in Newcastle while the rest of the UK was under strict lockdown rules, the Sunday Times reported. The probe is part of a wider Vatican inquiry into the diocese, involving multiple cases of sexual abuse.

In a letter reported by the newspaper on Sunday, the Archbishop of Liverpool said that he had been asked by the Pope’s advisers to compile “an in-depth report” into events leading up to the resignation of Robert Byrne as the Bishop of Hexham and Newcastle in December.

Byrne was made bishop in 2019, and immediately appointed Father Michael McCoy as the Dean of St. Mary’s Cathedral in Newcastle. 

When the UK was placed under strict lockdown rules the following year, McCoy allegedly approached several parishoners and asked them to attend “a party” at the cathedral, a source told the Times. This event was described by the source as “a sex party taking place in the priests’ living quarters attached to Newcastle cathedral.”

Keep reading

WSJ Shreds Vaccine Makers, Biden Admin Over “Deceptive” Booster Campaign

Wall Street Journal editorial board member Allysia Finley has taken a flamethrower to vaccine makers over their “deceptive” campaign for bivalent Covid boosters, and slams several federal agencies for taking “the unprecedented step of ordering vaccine makers to produce them and recommending them without data supporting their safety or efficacy.“

You might have heard a radio advertisement warning that if you’ve had Covid, you could get it again and experience even worse symptoms. The message, sponsored by the Health and Human Services Department, claims that updated bivalent vaccines will improve your protection.

This is deceptive advertising. But the public-health establishment’s praise for the bivalent shots shouldn’t come as a surprise. -WSJ

The narrative behind the campaign was simple; mRNA Covid shots could simply be ‘tweaked’ to to target new variants – in this case, the jabs were claimed to confer protection against BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron variants, along with the original Wuhan strain.

To call this wishful thinking would be extremely generous.

As Finley writes, three scientific problems have arisen.

  1. The virus is mutating much faster than vaccines can be updated.
  2. Vaccines have ‘hard wired’ our immune systems to respond to the original Wuhan strain, “so we churn out fewer antibodies that neutralize variants targeted by updated vaccines.”
  3. Antibody protection wanes after just a few months.

Finley has brought receipts too…

Two studies in the New England Journal of Medicine this month showed that bivalent boosters increase neutralizing antibodies against the BA.4 and BA.5 variants, but not significantly more than the original boosters. In one study, antibody levels after the bivalent boosters were 11 times as high against the Wuhan variant as BA.5.

The authors posit that immune imprinting “may pose a greater challenge than is currently appreciated for inducing robust immunity against SARS-CoV-2 variants.” This isn’t unique to Covid or mRNA vaccines, though boosters may amplify the effect. Our first exposure as children to the flu—whether by infection or vaccination—affects our future response to different strains. -WSJ

Here’s what happened

Keep reading

Time Shows That The ‘Paranoid’ People Were Correct About COVID

We are now three years after the COVID-19 apocalypse began, and the CDC and WHO still refuse to acknowledge that the virus was created in and escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). But they, along with all our institutions, have lied so often and so egregiously that 72% of the public doesn’t believe them. If nothing else, that is a very positive sign.

The evidence for the lab leak is as overwhelming as the evidence for a zoonotic origin is non-existent. For anyone trained in the art of biology to deny the lab origin betrays either deceit or, worse, willful ignorance.

Here I examine just three facts that together, if not singularly, prove dispositively that SARS-CoV-2 was a man-made lab creation. Not least of which is that they told us exactly what they were going to do.

Viruses are obligate intracellular parasites composed of genetic material—codons that specify the specific amino acids (there are 20) used to construct proteins—that hijack the machinery of the cell to produce more viruses.

This is no easy task and, to do so, viruses are extremely specialized and highly specific to their host. Viruses can and do randomly mutate; that is, they undergo random changes to their genetic code that can give them fitness in another host, albeit infrequently. Once they get a foothold in a new host, they continue to evolve by natural selection, making themselves better adapted to reproduce in their new host.

One key factor for a virus to be successful in a new host is to have a highly tuned receptor binding domain (RBD). The RBD allows the virus to recognize the host cell, bind to it, and get inside. In SARS, the RBD is 201 codons long. Jesse Bloom of Caltech analyzed the RBD codon sequence to determine what sequence would maximize binding to human cells. Of the 4000 possible combinations, SARS-CoV-2 showed up on day one over 99% optimized—only 21 codons short of perfection. As a verification of the validity of Bloom’s work, one of those 21 codons was later found in the more contagious Omicron variant to have mutated to Bloom’s prediction.

Keep reading

Meta gave the CDC de facto power to police Covid “misinfo”

The mask is slipping (pun fully intended), all over the place – regarding the Big Tech/Big Government collusion. Now it’s time to pay close attention to the role played by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

We’ve already been awed – just by the magnitude of the whole thing – if not exactly “shocked” by the Twitter Files.

After all, while it was happening, a whole lot of observers surmised that something of the sort had to be behind the unprecedented and, seemingly inexplicable levels of censorship on the platform.

But – what in the world was happening at Facebook, around the same time? After all, Facebook is an almost orders of magnitude bigger and more influential social network than Twitter.

For the time being, we don’t have the same “direct line” to internal documents as is the case with Twitter, which was made possible by the dedication to transparency by the new owner himself.

However, what could be dubbed as the “Facebook Files” are based on credible sources, too – Reason is coming out with a story based on confidential emails that emerged thanks to a court case – the state of Missouri suing the Biden administration.

The emails show that Facebook (and by extension Instagram) representatives and the CDC not only kept in touch at all times, but that the tech giant also “routinely asked government health officials to vet claims relating to the virus, mitigation efforts such as masks, and vaccines.”

Keep reading

Lockdowns Were Counterterrorism, Not Public Health 

As previously reported, in the United States, the Covid pandemic response was designed and led by the national security branches of government, not by any public health agency or official. 

Furthermore, we do not have a public record of what the national security pandemic plan actually stated. 

So what? You might ask. Why should we care if Covid policy was determined by the National Security Council (NSC) instead of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)? What’s so bad about the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) taking over as lead federal agency for pandemic response, replacing Health and Human Services (HHS)?

National security is about protecting us from threats of war and terrorism

The answer to these questions is, in short, that the national security pandemic response plans, devised under the rubric of biodefense, are aimed at countering bioterrorism attacks. They focus on preventing hostile actors from obtaining bioweapons, surveilling for potential bioweapons use, and developing medical countermeasures. 

According to the World Health Organization, “biological and toxin weapons are either microorganisms like virus, bacteria or fungi, or toxic substances produced by living organisms that are produced and released deliberately to cause disease and death in humans, animals or plants.” 

In the rare event of an actual bioweapons attack – the biodefense strategy can be summarized as quarantine-until-vaccine: keep individuals as isolated from the bioweapon as possible, for as long as necessary, until you have an effective medical countermeasure (medicine/vaccine). 

Bioterrorism response plans – under the broader umbrella of counterterrorism – are not designed to incorporate the complicated nuances of public health principles, which balance the need to protect individuals from a pathogen with the need to keep society as functional as possible to maintain overall well-being. 

If counterterrorism measures are deployed against a public health threat, it is thus not surprising to witness massive disruptions to society, and harms to public health – as we have seen with the Covid-19 pandemic response.

Keep reading

Is New Zealand A Beta Test For Western Governments Micromanaging The Populace?

In the wake of the covid pandemic lockdowns and mandates, many western nations and states in the US witnessed a new eye opening level of government intrusion into the daily lives of citizens.  Some, however, dealt with worse scenarios than others. 

New Zealand in particular has popped up time and time again over the past couple of years with some of the most draconian restrictions on the public, and sadly the trend has not stopped just because the pandemic lockdowns stopped.  The island nation seems to be intent on setting the standard for authoritarian policies and government micromanagement, and a series of recent laws are driving home the reality that they do not intend to relent.  

Flashback: In 2018, New Zealand banned all offshore oil drilling exploration in the name of instituting a “carbon neutral future”, meaning tight energy restrictions are forthcoming in NZ as the decade progresses.  

In 2019, NZ banned all semi-automatic weapons after the Christchurch mosque shootings, punishing millions of law abiding citizens for the crimes of one man.  Video evidence of the Christchurch shootings is suspiciously illegal in NZ, and anyone caught viewing or downloading the event can be prosecuted.  The gun bans were enforced just in time for the pandemic lockdowns.     

In 2020, the government introduced internet censorship legislation which would give them the power to selectively filter “dangerous content.”  Most of the provisions were ultimately scrapped after a public backlash, but future censorship remains a priority for the government. 

In 2021, New Zealand Prime Minister and associate of the World Economic Forum, Jacinda Ardern, openly admitted to constructing a two tier society in which the vaccinated enjoy normal access to the economy, travel and social interaction while the unvaccinated would be deliberately choked with restrictions until they “chose” to comply and accept the mRNA jab.

Keep reading

Dad Says FEMA Tried to Bribe Him After Teen Son’s Post-Vaccine Death: He Refused and Went Public

Ernest Ramirez says he wanted to do the right thing for his son, so he decided to have 16-year-old Ernesto take the COVID-19 vaccine.

After all, what was the harm? Ramirez was told the vaccine was 100 percent safe.

Five days later, on April 24, 2021, his son died from complications related to an enlarged heart, Ramirez told LifeSiteNews.

Soon after his son’s death, Ramirez says, he received a call from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. According to him, agency officials asked him to change the cause of death for his son to “COVID.”

Ramirez says they offered to help him financially in exchange for doing so.

Keep reading

Outrageous but unsurprising: Canadian judge tosses case against guards who killed a woman for not wearing a mask

Toronto hospital security guards killed a woman in March of 2020. For not pulling up a mask while suffering from breathing difficulties.

They were originally charged with manslaughter and criminal negligence, but a judge has tossed the case because … reasons.

There isn’t much dispute about what happened, although one of the guards involved intentionally turned a security camera away from the scene of the crime as it was happening, and another lied to police about what happened. He later was forced to admit to deceiving investigators when he was shown security footage contradicting his statement.

That’s OK though. He apologized, saying “I would have never said the things I said in there if I knew there was a video.” All good, then. That’s some world-class remorse.

The case seems pretty cut and dried. Danielle Stephanie Warriner, who suffered from COPD came to the hospital due to, unsurprisingly, breathing problems. She was admitted to the hospital, and was sitting in a hallway wearing PPE. She had lowered her mask due to her breathing problems. Guards approached her to enforce a mask mandate. She didn’t comply, again presumably because she had trouble breathing.

The guards donned PPE, demanded she don the mask, and then threw her against the wall almost immediately. While claiming that she struck them first, the video shows that this wasn’t true.

Right after throwing her to a wall, a different guard redirects the camera away from the incident, hiding what was happening. He “panicked,” so turning the camera away clearly didn’t show any consciousness of guilt, right?

Witnesses report the guards threw her to the ground, held her there in exactly the same manner that George Floyd was restrained (knee to the back using body weight). Only she had taken no meth or fentanyl. She was a 125-pound woman with breathing difficulties, as she told them.

They handcuffed her while unconscious and kept her restrained using a knee to the back. She stopped breathing. The guards load her into a wheelchair and eventually notice this fact and call for doctors. She subsequently died from her injuries, having never returned to consciousness.

The guards killed her. A women in respiratory distress in a hospital hallway, there to be treated.

Keep reading