Tag: pandemic

The Pandemic Response Was The Turning Point

The Republican convention made for great television, both entertaining and exciting, and infused with incredible energy after Trump’s miraculous survival of the assassination attempt. In the backdrop has been the astounding upheaval among Democrats: the drive to push Biden aside and get the top of the ticket replaced sooner rather than later, for fear of electoral loss in November.

All of this makes for wonderful drama, perfect for maximum views, public engagement, and the great American sport of politics.

It’s probably too much to ask for blunt truth in such contexts but there was and is one subject missing from the entire situation, and it provides the context for the rest. Whether it is the meltdown of trust, the inflation eating away purchasing power, the hard hit to household finances, the ill-health, the battle between the new media and old, and practically every other symptom you can name; they all trace to the same turning point.

Keep reading

U.S. Government ‘Saddled’ With COVID Vaccine Injury ‘Mess’ — While Vaccine Makers Avoid Liability

As early as January 2022, National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers were aware of at least 850 peer-reviewed case reports and/or research articles about COVID-19 vaccine reactions, according to emails obtained by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

In one email (name and agency redacted), NIH researchers were told the federal government was “saddled” with the “mess” of dealing with those injured by the COVID-19 vaccines, due to the liability shield enjoyed by vaccine manufacturers.

The emails, part of a 309-page batch of documents released to CHD on June 21, originated from a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) request to NIH researchers for input on a report highlighting several injuries common among people who received the vaccines.

CHD requested the documents via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the NIH in November 2022. When the NIH hadn’t responded by April 2023, CHD sued the agency.

In an October 2023 settlement, the NIH agreed to produce up to 7,500 pages of documents at a rate of 300 pages per month.

The batch of documents released in June — which include emails to Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research — revealed that by fall 2021, key NIH researchers were aware of scientific studies on serious adverse events, including persistent neurological symptoms, following COVID-19 vaccines.

As with prior releases of the NIH documents, June’s tranche also included several emails from vaccine-injured individuals to NIH researchers, seeking help for their symptoms — with one person asking, “Why aren’t you studying vaccine injuries?”

Keep reading

Update on Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) in SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination

Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) is a complex immunological phenomenon where virus-specific antibodies, rather than neutralizing the virus, enhance its entry into host cells and amplify its replication. ADE can occur in the context of natural infections and vaccinations, leading to heightened disease severity. This phenomenon has been observed in various viral infections, including respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), dengue, and HIV, and has been a subject of intense scrutiny in the context of SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19.

The historical context of ADE provides critical insights into its mechanisms and implications. One notable example is the RSV vaccine trials in the 1960s. Vaccinated children who later encountered natural RSV infection experienced more severe respiratory illness compared to unvaccinated children. This was attributed to ADE, where vaccine-induced antibodies facilitated enhanced viral entry and immune activation (Kim et al., 1969). Understanding the diverse mechanisms of ADE, its implications for vaccine development, and its potential occurrence in SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial. This comprehensive analysis aims to elucidate the different types of ADE, evidence of ADE in SARS-CoV-2, and the risks and proposed mitigation strategies associated with ADE in COVID-19 vaccines.

Keep reading

Joe Biden is taking Paxlovid, even though doctors know it doesn’t really work

Another summer outbreak of COVID-19 is here. President Biden announced he is sick with the virus on Wednesday, and he’s in good company.

Test positivity rates are up across the country, according to the latest Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, with rates especially high in California, New Mexico, and Nevada, where President Biden was traveling on Wednesday.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement on Wednesday that the president “has received his first dose” of Paxlovid, the antiviral treatment from Pfizer that’s meant to ease COVID-19 symptoms and make the virus less dangerous for high-risk patients.

But some experts wonder why you’d even prescribe this drug, which has been shown in study after study to be lackluster, at best.

Keep reading

Bombshell DHS Document Proves Pandemic Lockdowns Planned In 2007

We’ve just come across a document hosted by the Department of Homeland Security, posted March 2023, but written in 2007, that amounts to a full-blown corporatist imposition on the US, abolishing anything remotely resembling the Bill of Rights and Constitutional law. It is right there in plain sight for anyone curious enough to dig.

There is nothing in it that you haven’t already experienced with lockdowns. What makes it interesting are the participants in the forging of the plan, which is pretty much the whole of corporate America as it stood in 2007. It was a George W. Bush initiative. The conclusions are startling.

“Quarantine is a legally enforceable declaration that a government body may institute over individuals potentially exposed to a disease, but who are not symptomatic. If enacted, Federal quarantine laws will be coordinated between CDC and State and local public health officials, and, if necessary, law enforcement personnel…The government may also enact travel restrictions to limit the movement of people and products between geographic areas in an effort to limit disease transmission and spread. Authorities are currently reviewing possible plans to curtail international travel upon a pandemic’s emergence overseas.

“Limiting public assembly opportunities also helps limit the spread of disease. Concert halls, movie theaters, sports arenas, shopping malls, and other large public gathering places might close indefinitely during a pandemic—whether because of voluntary closures or government-imposed closures. Similarly, officials may close schools and non-essential businesses during pandemic waves in an effort to significantly slow disease transmission rates. These strategies aim to prevent the close interaction of individuals, the primary conduit of spreading the influenza virus. Even taking steps such as limiting person-to-person interactions within a distance of three feet or avoiding instances of casual close contact, such as shaking hands, will help limit disease spread.”

There we have it: the pandemic plans. They once seemed abstract. In 2020, they became very real. Your rights were deleted. No more freedom even to have house guests. In those days, the rule was to enforce only three feet of distance rather than six feet of distance, neither of which had any basis in science. Indeed, the actual scientific literature even at that time recommended against any physical interventions designed to limit the spread of respiratory viruses. They were known not to work. The entire profession of public health accepted that.

Keep reading

Sixfold Increased Risk of Colon Cancer in Covid-Vaccinated — Study

A study published in June documented how one form of colon cancer saw a sixfold increase in individuals vaccinated with the Covid injection. The researchers explained the link between the shot and the cancer.

“Microsatellite instable (deficient mismatch repair, dMMR) colon cancer is associated with hypermutability and immune infiltration-activation. COVID-19 vaccines stimulate immune-inflammation response,” the study said in the ‘Introduction’ section.

A medical doctor broke down the findings on social media.

“Pfizer vaccination conferred sixfold increased risk,” Dr. Peter McCullough said regarding the study’s findings.

The researchers discussed how the Covid injection affects the immune system in a way that is linked to the onset of this type of colon cancer.

“Immune infiltration in dMMR colon cancer may interact with COVID-19 vaccine-induced immune activation,” the study said in the ‘Conclusion’ section.

The researchers compared the vaccinated and non-vaccinated cancer patients.

“The study was a single-center case-control study. Patients diagnosed with colon cancer at least three months after the last COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2, CoronaVac) dose were included. Patients with dMMR and microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors were defined as cases and controls, respectively, between June 2021 and June 2023,” the study said in the ‘Methods’ section. “Baseline characteristics and vaccine status between case-control groups were compared as univariable and multivariable. Inflammation markers were compared between MSS+CoronaVac and dMMR+BNT162b2 groups.”

After analyzing the study, Dr. McCullough discussed its findings on his Substack.

Keep reading

Pfizer is acquiring drug companies to profit from chronic diseases caused by their own COVID-19 “vaccines”

If you want to know the long-term side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, pay close attention to Pfizer’s latest acquisitions. Since the rollout of their COVID-19 vaccine, Pfizer has acquired specific pharmaceutical companies that treat immune-inflammatory diseases, heart inflammation and various cancers. As their experimental use vaccine was being mandated on the population (including on the military) Pfizer was investing in drugs that target health conditions that were created and/or exacerbated by their experimental vaccines.

Pfizer acquired a drug company that treats immune-inflammatory diseases, including myocarditis

For instance, in 2021, Pfizer acquired Arena Pharmaceuticals. The price tag of the acquisition was disproportionate to the market size of the drug they acquired, but the shrewd Pfizer executive team knew the acquisition would be worth it in the end. By acquiring Arena Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer was able to control the future of therapeutics for various immune-inflammatory diseases, including drugs that address heart inflammation (myocarditis and pericarditis). These health problems skyrocketed after 2021, when Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines were unlawfully mandated on populations and haphazardly placed on the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule. Today, Pfizer is profiting from health issues that they caused, keeping people in a state of illness and pharmaceutical dependence.

Pfizer acquires drug company that treats various cancers, capitalizing on the turbo cancer epidemic

By 2023, Pfizer spent $43 billion of their vaccine profits to acquire Seagen Pharmaceuticals, a little-known drug company that specializes in cancer treatments. Now, Pfizer is profiting from the surge in turbo cancers that are affecting vaccinated people of all age groups. Turbo cancer is a new phenomenon where oncologists describe a new wave of aggressive cancers that that kill people in weeks or days, as opposed to months or years. There’s no doubt that something is causing immunodeficiency. The very thing that populations were told to take to protect those with immunodeficiency has created an entire new class of people with immunodeficiency and turbo cancers. Meanwhile, their destructive biological weapons remain on the market, ensuring that these health issues continue to be profitable ventures for years to come.

Keep reading

COVID panel recommends ending Chinese immunity against U.S. lawsuits, but invokes strange statistics

Republican and Democratic heavy-hitters from the intelligence and political worlds are calling for legislative changes to hold China accountable for the economic harm caused by its ongoing lack of transparency on COVID-19, which they estimate to have cost $18 trillion in the U.S. alone.

Convened by the conservative Heritage Foundation, the nine-member Nonpartisan Commission on China and COVID-19 is dominated by former Trump administration officials but also includes a former Clinton administration National Security Council director and ex-Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota.

Their report Monday calls for Congress to create and fund a “bipartisan U.S. National COVID-19 Commission” and a “Reparations/Compensation Task Force,” and revise the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act to allow civil claims against China in U.S. courts, paid with “a deduction on interests or debts owed to China or through deductions from foreign aid funds to China.”

Lawmakers should establish an audit of U.S.-funded biomedical and related research in China, with a “rebuttable presumption” that funding should be cut unless sponsors can show the research projects are “overwhelmingly in the public interest and entail extremely low risk of harm.” Another federal commission would oversee the review. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson mentioned one of their recommendations, passing the Biosecure Act to decouple supply chains from Chinese state-backed companies, at a Hudson Institute speech Monday.

“China poses the greatest threat to global peace” and “Congress must keep our focus on countering China with every tool in our code,” the Louisiana Repubican said. “Our goal is to have a significant package of China-related legislation signed into law by the end of this year.”

The commission recommends the president demand, as a “diplomatic priority,” that China allow a “comprehensive, unfettered scientific and forensic investigation” into COVID origins, economic sanctions on officials and entities involved with the “cover-up,” and recognizing the pandemic as “similar to the dawning of the nuclear age,” with corresponding changes to law and commerce.

The report makes curious choices with its statistics, however, possibly to inflate the amount of damages for which China could be held liable.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Rejects Challenges to COVID-19 Shot Mandates

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected appeals to two COVID shot mandate-related cases brought by Children’s Health Defense (CHD). In one case, CHD appealed a lower court ruling that the non-profit group lacked standing to sue the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over its authorization of the COVID-19 shots for young children. In the other case, CHD challenged the COVID shot mandate for students at Rutgers University in New Jersey.1

The Supreme Court did not issue an explanatory statement along with their denial of these appeals.2 By refusing to hear the cases, the Supreme Court has allowed the opinions of the lower court to stand.3

Appellate Court Dismissed CHD’s Claims Against the FDA

CHD, together with five sets of parents, sued the FDA over its emergency use authorization COVID shots for minors. The District Court dismissed the case finding that the Plaintiffs did not have standing to sue and the 5th Circuit Appellate Court affirmed that ruling. Plaintiffs alleged that when the FDA granted pharmaceutical companies an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to distribute the experimental biologicals, it did not adhere to the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) reasoned decision-making requirements. Plaintiffs sought an injunction forbidding the marketing or promotion of the shots.4

A Plaintiff will have standing to sue when it has been demonstrated that the Plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact that is, “concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent;” the defendant caused the injury; and the injury would likely be redressed by the court.5 The injury must also be concrete, which has been defined as “whether the alleged injury to the Plaintiff has a ‘close relationship’ to a harm ‘traditionally’ recognized as providing a basis for a lawsuit in American courts.”6

The Appellate Court agreed with the District Court that the Plaintiffs did not satisfy their burden of showing that their injury was concrete, particularized or imminent, rather than merely speculative.

The Appellate Court wrote:

To begin, it is insufficient that Plaintiff allege that some hypothetical third party might, at some hypothetical point in the future and through some hypothetical means, will vaccinate their children against their wishes.7

The Appellate Court added that CHD also lacked standing because the organization has not “diverted significant resources to counteract” the EUA granted to the COVID shots by the FDA. The Appellate Court ruling went on to state that the Plaintiff also has not shown that the FDA’s authorization, “concretely and ‘perceptibly impaired’” its ability to fulfill their mission. The courts dismissed the action due to lack of standing.8

Keep reading

Prof. Angus Dalgleish: The use of mRNA injections is criminal negligence

Well well well, two of the most senior oncologists in the world this week shared their alarming findings with the experimental covid gene therapies. First, we have Prof. Fukushima, and now Prof Angus Dalgleish has reiterated his call to ban all mRNA vaccinations immediately in a forum with Senator Ron Johnson on 26 April 2024.

Throw Professor Gabriel Oon in there too, Singapore’s most senior oncologist and founding President of Singapore’s Society of Oncology, who has been warning about the dangers of mRNA tech for some time now.

Could it be that these eminent oncologists from different parts of the world suddenly stopped supporting experimental vaccines and together started saying no to mRNA gene therapy as if they planned it? Let’s get to the heart of it: what these three vocal critics have in common is that they’re retired. This means they don’t have to worry about losing their jobs or money for speaking up. But there are many others still working who keep quiet because they’re afraid of risking their jobs.

So, here comes Prof. Angus Dalgleish. He’s not just any doctor making noise online; he’s a major player in the health field, the genius behind the discovery of the CD4 receptor, and now the head of The Institute of Cancer Vaccines and Immunotherapy. Discovering the CD4 receptor is a massive deal because it’s like finding the secret entrance that the HIV virus uses to invade the body’s cells, causing AIDS. Prof. Dalgleish’s discovery has led to breakthroughs in medicine, allowing us to create treatments that lock this entrance and keep the virus out. Because of his work, we’ve been able to give people fighting HIV a fighting chance. That’s why Prof Dalgleish is such a big name in the battle against HIV/AIDS.

Regarding the mRNA gene therapy, Prof. Dalgleish didn’t just talk about the bad stuff linked to spike proteins, like blood clotting and the scary Guillain-Barre syndrome. He went even further, sharing stories about his patients. These were people who had been doing well in their fight against cancer, but after getting the booster shot, they faced big setbacks. Their cancer came back worse than before. “I started to see in my melanoma clinic patients who’d been stable for years, who suddenly came in, relapsed. Sometimes the relapse was quite vicious. I mean, they had very bad disease. We had to treat them all over again,” he said. This shows how tough things got for them after the booster.

On top of that, Prof Angus Dalgleish watched three of his friends get the booster shot because they wanted to travel after being trapped at home for two to three years. Tragically, all three of them saw their cancer come back. Even worse, two of them died because the cancer didn’t respond to the treatments that usually work. This heartbreaking experience is why Dalgleish has started to speak out so strongly. He calls the use of mRNA platform in infectious disease “a gross medical negligence… really, this criminal negligence now, knowing what we do.” If that’s not a mic drop moment, I don’t know what is.

Keep reading