Tag: covid-19

‘The Military Has Lost Its Way’: Former Service Member Rips DOD’s Use of Remdesivir

The military’s use of remdesivir to treat COVID-19 caused the deaths of at least 600 service members, according to the recently released “Remdesivir Papers.”

For one former service member, it was a sign that “the military has lost its way.”

Brad Miller, a former lieutenant colonel with the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army — and a founding member of the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Military Chapter — was able to review “The Remdesivir Papers” before their release on Oct. 4.

He joined “The Defender In-Depth” this week to discuss the papers’ revelations.

Miller left the military after 19 years of service after deciding not to comply with its COVID-19 vaccine mandate. He told “The Defender In-Depth” that current military leadership “led this institution into disarray” when it caved to financial and political pressure to administer the controversial antiviral drug remdesivir — despite its known risks — to “a captive population.”

According to Miller, “The Remdesivir Papers” reveal “some collusion” in early 2020 between the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. He said the military’s collusion with other government agencies “served as an indicator of what would happen across the wider society shortly thereafter.”

Miller said he was offered the opportunity to review “The Remdesivir Papers” before their publication by the anonymous military whistleblower who later released them. The whistleblower was aware of Miller’s “personal skepticism” about a lot of the stories that came out of the DOD regarding COVID-19.

“I think what people will immediately see … is there’s more to just the entire COVID-19 situation than just the lockdowns or the potential problems — either medical or legal — with the COVID shot mandates.”

Miller said:

“What ‘The Remdesivir Papers’ do is allow us to kind of open our aperture and realize that what happened over the last couple of years is bigger than just lockdowns. It’s bigger than just COVID shots.

“There were other things that were just as problematic, like the widespread use of remdesivir as an ostensible treatment protocol for those that ostensibly had COVID-19.”

Keep reading

Covid Was Mass Murder

Of course, there’s no “pandemic” this time to cover for the trip that the Party of Chaos wants to lay on the country, no excuse for gross and glaring ballot fuckery, for the days of anxious uncertainty following an election. Everybody and his uncle expect a gigantic tantrum to follow November 6 if Mr. Trump somehow overcomes the tide of bogus harvested votes, illegal alien votes, phantom overseas votes, voting machine swapped votes, lost-and-found votes, last-minute rafts of votes, and other products of the Marc Elias election sabotage machine.

     I am not so sure that the tantrum will materialize. Despite the orgy of Orwellian language inversions you have been subjected to in recent years, and the bending of reality it induced, you will know a real insurrection if you see it. You already know the real reason the Democratic Party went insane: its crime spree against the citizens of this land was so obvious and outrageous that a thousand Beltway bureaucrats are now going crazy in fear of prosecution. The tantrum everyone expects them to provoke would be a real insurrection and they are liable to find themselves in even deeper trouble for resorting to it.

      Crime is the whole reason for the Democrats’ desperation. There was no “policy” the past four years, only crime. The Covid operation was a mass murder. The open border was not something that just happened, like a spell of bad weather. It was a colossal racketeering operation. They worked it hard. “Joe Biden” paid dozens of NGO cut-outs to systematically jam more than ten million sketchy interlopers into the country, and then support them lavishly with cash payments when they got here.

Keep reading

New paper shows COVID boosters increased mortality in nursing home residents. The effect was highly statistically significant after 4 weeks.

A new paper by Girma and Paton showed by using machine learning a small but dubious (and short lived) benefit for nursing home residents in 2 of 3 metrics. In other words, they couldn’t find a definitive benefit for the primary series and they found NO benefit for additional shots.

In fact, for the boosters, they found a highly statistically significant INCREASE in COVID mortality after the boosters were administered.

We should only be giving these shots if there is a clear and significant benefit, not “we aren’t sure” or “there is no benefit.” But when there is a highly statistically significant harm, alarm bells should go off!

The paper says, “Indeed, in the later period, we find some evidence that higher vaccination rates are associated with higher Covid mortality.” A safe and effective vaccine shouldn’t be even close to causing a conclusion like that.

Additionally, vaccinating the nursing home staff also appeared to have a negative impact on residents. There, the impact on both COVID deaths and all-cause deaths was 100% consistent in all 7 time periods and for each vaccine dose: it always made things worse, and for the primary series where every single one of the 14 measures were highly statistically significant (99% confident).

This is yet another paper showing continuation of COVID vaccination is nonsensical. But the data doesn’t seem to matter and nobody wants to talk about it.

As usual, expect the mainstream media to ignore this paper as they do for any paper that shows that the health interventions were detrimental.

Keep reading

In Email Obtained by ICAN, a Fauci Senior Advisor Admits CDC’s Data “Shockingly Messed Up” and Leaders Have “Serious Issues”

During a recent Congressional hearing, we learned that David Morens prided himself on his ability to avoid transparency and purposefully evade FOIA. The hearing revealed emails in which Morens boasted that he “learned from our [FOIA] lady here how to make most emails disappear” and “we are all smart enough to know to never have smoking guns, and if we did we wouldn’t put them in emails and if we found them we’d delete them.”

But in a recent FOIA production obtained by ICAN’s attorneys, we discovered that Morens failed to delete at least one smoking gun. In an April 2020 email to Greg Folkers, Fauci’s Chief of Staff, Morens made an astonishing admission about CDC’s long-term incompetence in handling data and NIH’s willingness to cover it up:

Greg, please keep this confidential but you should know that for over a decade the flu folks at CDC have shockingly messed up their tabulations of flu mortality. We discovered 5-10 years ago that various web page and published data were totally inconsistent and could only be explained by major uncaught errors[.]

… apparently various folks in [t]he flu division made and put up and published mutually-inconsistent figures based on differing subjective assumptions[.]

Several years ago, maybe 4-5, we reached out to the top flu people at CDC informing them that their own data were problematic, that as a sister agency we did NOT want to draw attention to it but work with them privately to fix and reconcile the problems. At first they were grateful, and set up a mechani[sm] to work with us, but then when they discovered the depths of their own mistakes … they did the usual CDC thing and circled the wagons, refused to return calls and emails, etc. [W]e didn’t pursue things but were left unsettled.

To repeat, this was at the level of cdc’s flu leadership. I think we have to accept that they have serious issues and have not fixed them.

Let’s not forget that throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, we were told to “trust the experts,” many of whom worked for CDC. Recommendations and edicts handed down from on high at CDC were treated as gospel. The few brave souls who had the courage to publicly question CDC’s judgment were met with derision, pejoratives, censorship, and attacks on their careers and reputations. This makes it all the more infuriating to learn that, according to Morens, the “usual CDC thing” to do when its mistakes are discovered is to ignore the problem and refuse to discuss it—even when the mistake is discovered by another government agency!

Keep reading

Hospitals willingly subjected patients to deadly protocols during the pandemic to generate financial incentives from government

Testimonials from nurses who worked at hospitals during the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic have revealed that these healthcare institutions willingly subjected patients to deadly protocols and punished whistleblowers who spoke out against hospital treatment protocols.

This is according to author Ken McCarthy, whose book “What the Nurses Saw” investigated what he called the “systemic medical murder” that was taking place in hospitals during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. He noted how government policymakers during COVID-19 “created one of the biggest terror campaigns in the history of mankind.” (Related: HOSPITAL HOMICIDE: New study points to evidence that some COVID-19 patients were euthanized by hospitals.)

McCarthy explained that these deadly protocols came from the National Institutes of Health. Hospital executives who were financially incentivized to implement these policies would then pass on the orders even though many hospital employees were aware of how dangerous and even deadly these policies were.

The biggest reason for many dangerous and deadly encounters at hospitals is the administering of what McCarthy called the “failed drug” remdesivir. He noted how the use of remdesivir was halted in the entire continent of Africa because it caused organ failure.

Among other factors that led to many hospital deaths include the denial of anti-inflammatory medications and inhalable steroids, the use of BiPAP masks – which often caused panic attacks that led to the administering of tranquilizers that further weakened the respiratory system – and the use of ventilators.

All of these factors along with other care policies for COVID-19 patients were a “recipe for disaster,” according to McCarthy.

Keep reading

Survey Reveals Over One in Six Germans Report Side Effects from COVID-19 Vaccination

As the world reflects on the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, alarming new data from Germany reveals that the experimental COVID vaccines, may have left far more harm in their wake than originally acknowledged.

A recent survey conducted by the Forsa Institute shows that over one in six Germans report experiencing side effects from their vaccination—an undeniable red flag that mainstream media continues to downplay.

The representative survey conducted on behalf of the German newspaper “Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung” (NOZ) and the online magazine “Multipolar,” polled 1,002 individuals on October 7 and 8.

According to the survey results, more than one in six Germans has experienced side effects due to the COVID-19 vaccine.

A significant 17 percent of respondents openly stated they did not “tolerate the COVID vaccination well overall.” This figure challenges the widespread narrative of “safe and effective” vaccinations promoted by health agencies worldwide.

Meanwhile, 10 percent of respondents reported not receiving the vaccine.

Though 73 percent reported no adverse reactions, the data still leaves a considerable group of Germans facing unsettling vaccine side effects.

Keep reading

Slovak government’s investigation into the covid pandemic finds it was a “fabricated operation” and calls for ban on mRNA injections

The Slovak government commissioner for investigating the management of the coronavirus pandemic, Peter Kotlár, considers mRNA injections to be dangerous and has called for a ban. He also calls the covid pandemic an “act of bioterrorism” and a “fabricated operation.”

On 2 October, after it had been submitted to the Government, Kotlár gave a press conference about his report.  The key recommendations from his report include halting the use of mRNA “vaccines,” that SARS-CoV-2 was artificially created in a laboratory and deliberately spread worldwide, and ending Slovakia’s cooperation with the World Health Organisation.  The report will be made public “but let’s wait first for a session of the government,” he said.

“The most serious consequence of the whole fabricated operation called the covid-19 pandemic is the endangerment of human health and the confirmation of the naivety of the world population to be subconsciously obedient,” Kotlár said.

“Let us at least make the right gesture together by stopping the administration of mRNA preparations until their effectiveness and safety have been proven,” Kotlar demanded when presenting his report. The most serious finding is that mRNA preparations alter human DNA, he claims. The vaccines have been inadequately tested and are therefore dangerous.

Keep reading

There is only myocarditis and pericarditis in covid vaccinated children, study finds

A study was published in May 2024 by the Bennet Institute for Applied Data Science, a multidisciplinary team based at the University of Oxford. It was an observational study to assess the safety and effectiveness of the first and second doses of Pfizer-BioNTech’s (BNT162b2) covid injection in children and adolescents in England.  The injection was offered to this age group from September 2021 as part of the Government’s national covid injection campaign.

The study used the OpenSAFELY-TPP database and included adolescents aged 12-15 years and children aged 5-11 years, comparing unvaccinated and single-vaccinated children with those receiving a second dose.

It compared data for at least 1,678,668 children and adolescents comprising:

  • 820,926 unvaccinated adolescents.
  • 441,858 adolescents who had received a first dose.
  • 283,422 unvaccinated children.
  • 132,462 children who had received a first dose
  • There is no indication of how many adolescents and children who had received a second dose were included in the study.

The study used the incidence rate ratio (“IRR”), separately for children and adolescents, to compare unvaccinated outcomes to vaccinated outcomes and the first does (single-vaccinated) to those who had two doses of Pfizer’s “vaccine.”

IRR measures the relative difference in incidence rates between two groups.  An IRR greater than 1 indicates a higher incidence rate in one group compared to the other group. An IRR less than 1 indicates a lower incidence rate in one group compared to the other group. An IRR of 1 indicates no significant difference in incidence rates between the two groups.

Keep reading

Whistleblower: Remdesivir linked to 601 military deaths

A military whistleblower has released documents, known as “The Remdesivir Papers,” revealing that 601 military service members died after being treated with the controversial antiviral drug remdesivir for suspected COVID-19 cases. The documents claim the drug was administered months before it was approved by the FDA, with serious concerns about data manipulation and lack of informed consent in the trials.

The whistleblower, using the pseudonym Daniel LeMay, shared the documents with investigative journalist J.M. Phelps, exposing that many trial results were kept secret and highlighting remdesivir’s potential role in hundreds of untimely deaths. According to LeMay, the Department of Defense’s Joint Trauma System manipulated trial data to favor remdesivir, and participants were often not informed about the risks involved.

Advocacy groups and former victims of COVID-19 hospital protocols, including those involving remdesivir, have expressed outrage, calling for greater accountability. Gail Seiler, a survivor of remdesivir treatment, stated that the papers “only scratch the surface” of the harm caused by the drug in both military and civilian hospitals.

Keep reading

Authors of a big new paper on Covid’s heart risks presented its results in a misleading way likely to scare people the paper itself shows are not in danger

On Wednesday, the Cleveland Clinic released frightening news:

“History of COVID-19 Doubles Long-term Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke and Death”

The renowned medical center was publicizing new research led by Dr. Stanley Hazen, one of its top physicians. He and other scientists examined the medical records of people infected with Covid in 2020 and found they had twice the risk of serious cardiovascular problems as uninfected people through 2024.

The National Institutes of Health, which funded the work, also put out a release warning Covid-19 “increased risk of heart attack [and] stroke up to three years later.” CNN and other media outlets also reported on the research with similar language.

In the Cleveland Clinic press release, Dr. Hazen did not sugarcoat the dangers. “The findings reported are not a small effect in a small subgroup,” he said. “[They] point to a finding of global healthcare importance that promises to translate into a rise in cardiovascular disease globally.”

Except they don’t. Hazen’s promise isn’t true.

The study’s real findings are very different than the frightening headlines.

For the vast majority of people who have had Covid, the research offered reassuring results. It showed essentially no increase in risk in heart attacks, strokes, or deaths for them.

Yet Hazen and his co-authors are not outright lying about what they found in their paper, which was published in the peer-reviewed journal Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology.

To run the study, they looked for Covid infections among British adults in 2020 a large database called UK Biobank. They came up with about 10,000 adults who had had Covid, and compared them to a group of about 220,000 adults who had not.

They found that over the next three years1, the 10,000 infected people were more likely than the uninfected control group to have heart attacks, strokes or die — an endpoint called MACE, or major adverse cardiovascular events.

As the paper reported, “the risk of MACE was elevated in COVID-19 cases at all levels of severity (HR, 2.09).” [emphasis added, keep that phrase in mind]

But. Hazen and the study’s other authors published and discussed the results in a way that hide a crucial fact.

Keep reading