CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

[Heliobas Disciple]

What new shots are coming, is anybody liable, and getting flu might protect you from COVID

Despite the USG ordering new COVID boosters for $3.2 B, it is not clear yet what will be used

merylnass.substack.com

(fair use applies)



What new shots are coming, is anybody liable, and getting flu might protect you from COVID
Despite the USG ordering new COVID boosters for $3.2 B, it is not clear yet what will be used
Meryl Nass
6 hr ago

Many older vaccines are already approved for this coming flu season, while many others remain in development. Some have been promised to the public despite complete lack of human trials of the COVID Omicron BA. 4 and BA. 5 variants.
It is amusing to watch the media, citing CDC, try to push as many vaccines as possible while admitting in the same article the vaccines don't actually work: if you are lucky to get some immunity from them, it quickly evaporates, while you are likely to get no immunity to current strains from the current vaccine, which is still based on the original Wuhan strain of COVID that disappeared 2 years ago.

For example, the NY Times bobs and weaves around these facts in a classic demonstration of propaganda, telling the truth but then immediately misdirecting your attention:

Some people may also be discouraged by new research that shows immunity against infection dips significantly within three months, and the newest Omicron subvariants are much more adept at dodging immunity than earlier versions of the virus, Dr. Osterholm added.​

​

New vaccines more targeted toward Omicron subvariants will likely arrive in the fall, and the Biden administration is considering expanding booster eligibility. But if you are in a high-risk group that is eligible for second boosters, you should not try to game out the timing of your shots. According to the C.D.C., getting vaccinated now “will not prevent you from getting an authorized variant-specific vaccine in the fall or winter when they are recommended for you.”​

What new vaccines will be offered? The manufacturers tested vaccines against BA.1 but FDA decided it wanted vaccines against a mix of the original strain, plus BA.4 and 5. Biden ordered 105 million doses from Pfizer the day after the FDA advisory meeting that signed off on adding some omicron variant(s) to the mix. Were somebody’s campaign coffers running low?

Other manufacturers have promised they will have large quantities of new COVID boosters, or flu-COVID vaccines, ready during the fall, but which will the FDA authorize or approve for use? That we don't know.

Does the government think it will get away with mandating the newer, still-to-be-revealed vaccines?

I have selected just a few of the vaccines in development from the precision vaccinations website, to show what you might be encountering soon. These use either the insect/baculovirus Novavax platform (1) or mRNA platforms (4).

What is the takeaway message? For decades, hundreds of companies have designed vaccine prototypes, but very few ever made it past the hurdles to licensure. Now, those hurdles have been kicked to the curb, and if you are lucky enough to have a prototype in 2022, you may be able to sell it to the USG with virtually no trial data, in record time. You will have hit pay dirt. But what will those contracts look like? What is being hidden? Is the manufacturer or the government in charge of the potion? Are any of the actors subject to liability?

[1] NanoFlu is a quadrivalent recombinant hemagglutinin (H.A.) protein nanoparticle influenza vaccine produced by Novavax in its SF9 insect cell baculovirus system. NanoFlu uses H.A. amino acid protein sequences similar to the recommended wild-type circulating virus H.A. sequences. In addition, NanoFlu contains Novavax's patented saponin-based Matrix-M™ adjuvant. [Note: the vaccine does not include neuraminidase antigens for influenza--Nass]​

​

[2] CureVac's seasonal influenza second-generation mRNA vaccine candidate, CVSQIV, was developed with GSK. The differentiated multivalent vaccine candidate features multiple non-chemically modified mRNA constructs to induce immune responses against relevant targets of four different influenza strains.​

​

[3] Moderna's combination respiratory vaccine candidate (mRNA-1230) is envisioned as an annual booster targeting SARS-CoV-2, influenza virus, and RSV vaccines.​

​

[4] Moderna's seasonal influenza vaccine candidates, mRNA-1020 and mRNA-1030, include eight mRNAs targeting hemagglutinin and neuraminidase at different doses and ratios.​

​

[5] Moderna's mRNA-1010 Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine candidate encodes for the hemagglutinin protein from four seasonal influenza viruses, including A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and influenza B/Yamagata- and B/Victoria-lineages. [Neuraminidase antigens have been omitted here too.]​

Oh, and by the way, the precision vaccination site reveals that it may actually help you to get COVID and influenza at the same time. Look at this:

A peer-reviewed study published by the Journal of Virology on Jul. 12, 2022, suggests that coinfection with influenza A virus (IAV) and the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus changes neither the trajectory nor the severity of influenza A virus, regardless of timing. However, contracting influenza A first could suppress any COVID-19 infection caused by SARS-CoV-2. 'We observe a significant loss of SARS-CoV-2 replication following IAV infection.' Notably, the investigators found that the influenza A virus interferes with SARS-CoV-2 replication in the lung and can continue to do so even more than one week after clearance of the IAV, according to the research. ​

​

.​

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Ghoulishly clever psyop pits our own defense mechanisms against us

Prevents the vaccinated from seeing the light as it is just too painful

merylnass.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Ghoulishly clever psyop pits our own defense mechanisms against us
Prevents the vaccinated from seeing the light as it is just too painful
Meryl Nass
3 hr ago


1. Multiple papers now suggest that COVID mRNA vaccines impair not just immunity to COVID, but immunity and immune surveillance overall.

The implication is that the vaxxed are more susceptible to a variety of infections, and perhaps also to cancer. Immune surveillance is what identifies cancer cells and kills them before they can proliferate.

So, you are vaccinated. The implications of this information are too frightening to be allowed into consciousness. You don't need the external censors to suppress this knowledge; you do it automatically with your built-in defense mechanisms.

2. Data from multiple countries now shows that all cause mortality (deaths from everything) are higher in the vaccinated.
This is just as scary, if not more so, than an increased risk of serious infections and cancer. You deny and/or suppress this information, because it simply cannot be allowed to be true.

3. You vaccinated your child. This may have impaired their fertility, increased the cancer risk, etc. etc. etc.

Of all pieces of information that absolutely cannot be allowed to enter your consciousness, let alone be openly discussed in polite company, this one tops all. So you will simply refuse to allow mention of it. Friends whose conversations veer off in this direction must be obliterated. Requiring that all family members and friends be vaccinated protects you from facing those for whom this discussion does not trigger the existential and uncontrollable pain it does for the vaccinated.

And Voila--you have a controlled and cowed population who have become their own thought police.
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Suspend your disbelief, or else.

The pandemic response has always been about control. Anyone that tells you otherwise is lying, if only to themselves. Of course, that statement, from a skeptic like me, would likely invoke staunch denials and accusations. Even though those who dared to speak out were met with control-oriented...

jestre.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Suspend your disbelief, or else.
Jestre
10 hr ago

The pandemic response has always been about control.

Anyone that tells you otherwise is lying, if only to themselves. Of course, that statement, from a skeptic like me, would likely invoke staunch denials and accusations. Even though those who dared to speak out were met with control-oriented statements like “since when does your freedom outweigh my safety”. The more self-aware true believers might contextualize that sentence with “control…in the name of public health”. In any case, control has been a constant theme since the early months of 2020.

That first year was about control of the body: masks, physical distancing, curfews, plexiglass barriers, travel bans and movement restrictions. “Lockdown”, a dystopian term once relegated only to prisons, became ubiquitous and has been referred to in an almost tender manner by lockdown adherents.

The second year was about control of the mind. Oh yes, many of the themes from the first year lingered — these physical controls were ultimately caricatured in the form of vaccine passports. However, there was something more sinister than the passports: the venomous hatred spewing from the mouths of politicians, public health officials, and true believers alike. Skeptics have been shamed and blamed for the continuation of the pandemic. A strange dichotomy as the people funding and working in the lab from which the virus escaped have at times been lauded as heroes, trusted as experts, or allowed to quietly disappear as they so chose.

Instead, it was called a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” and we were supposed to be in for “a winter of severe illness and death”. Overseas, some French metro-sexual politician claimed his strategy was to “shit on” the unvaccinated until the pandemic ended, which was about par for the course amongst politicians. Most of the western media translated that particular statement as “annoy” or “piss off”; however, the traditional meaning of the word is closer to the actions taken against the unvaccinated in France.

Locally, a doctor claimed on the radio that many of his colleagues felt the unvaccinated did not deserve treatment and, true to their word, some refused treatment to those without the password (Hint: The password is “lawyer”). While this was not an official position taken by health authorities in my province, I am personally aware of two instances where this sort of discrimination happened. Notably, one of the instances included a fully vaccinated cancer patient coming to the hospital for chemotherapy who just happened to forget her vaccine passport at home. These may have been independent, despicable actions taken by rogue health care workers; however, the fact that they felt empowered to openly discriminate is not surprising given the messaging.

In other forums, language devolved into recitations of Mein Kampf as the unvaccinated were called “parasites on our society”, and it was not hard to find comments from people hoping the unvaccinated die. The marginalization was combined with the threat of a loss of livelihood on many fronts.

Did the “public health” people never consider the effect this could have?

There is a story from a 1957 article in the Journal of Prospective Techniques about a patient with advanced malignancy of the lymph nodes. His situation was thus:

“Huge tumor masses, the size of oranges, were in the neck, axillas, groins, chest and abdomen. The spleen and liver were enormous. The thoracic duct was obstructed, and between 1 and 2 liters of milky flued had to be drawn from his chest every other day. He was taking oxygen by mask frequently, and our impression was that he was in a terminal state, untreatable, other than to give sedatives to ease him on his way”​

Yet, he heard about a novel cancer treatment being evaluated, Krebiozen. Due to his advanced state, the patient was not eligible to receive the treatment. However, he begged his doctor for inclusion in the evaluation who, reluctantly, acquiesced.

After just the first weekend, “the tumor masses had melted like snow balls on a hot stove, and in only these few days, they were half their original size”, and within 10 days he was discharged from the hospital. However, within months, reports began to surface that clinics were reporting no results from the drug. The patient read these reports; subsequently, his cancer returned aggressively.

His doctor decided to perform an experiment with the knowledge that nothing he could do would help the patient. He lied to him. The doctor claimed that the drug worked in higher concentrations and a new version of the drug with double the strength would be arriving soon. The next day, the doctor “administered the first injection of the doubly potent, fresh preparation consisting of fresh water and nothing more” — the treatment quickly worked.

As with the first administration of the treatment, the patient began to recover for the next few months until he read an American Medical Association announcement that said “nationwide tests show Krebiozen to be a worthless drug in the treatment of cancer”. Within a few days, the patient died.

This story is a classic example of the way psychology can be reflected in medical outcomes.

Now, imagine you’re a mad scientist with a financial interest in a certain drug, and you are given the opportunity to run a society wide experiment with no ethical constraints.

Running a massive, unprecedented propaganda campaign, then simply giving the drug to the people that believe it works would be a good start. Honestly, the drug would probably look like it works based on that alone. But you know what would be better? If you can humiliate, degrade, stress, and disenfranchise everyone who is not taking the drug. That would lead to worse health outcomes in the people you are using as a comparison group.

I’m not making an argument, of course, that the vaccine was merely a placebo from the beginning. Initially, I believe that it had limited (but overstated) medium term effects based on the data I have seen prior to omicron. This was coupled with initial negative effectiveness, a relatively quick waning of protection, and questionable long term impacts to the immune system. However, considering the environmental conditions the true believers created, I am beginning to wonder to what degree that initial effectiveness was overstated.

Given that some of the most credible and established effects in the medical literature stem from placebos (for their benefits) and stressors (for their costs), it would be difficult to imagine a scenario in which the public health blitz did not have a major effect on outcomes. The whole spectacle was downright criminal from a scientific standpoint and in terms of public health even if we otherwise ignore the dystopian aspects.
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Mrs Fauci on the Ethics of Encouraging Employees to get Vaccinated

If you add Ethics in the title then it must be ethical

nakedemperor.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Mrs Fauci on the Ethics of Encouraging Employees to get Vaccinated
If you add Ethics in the title then it must be ethical
NE - nakedemperor.substack.com
17 hr ago

Should employers encourage their employees to get the COVID-19 vaccination? Of course not, they pay their employees to do a job, not lecture them on their life choices. However, some people think employers should be encouraging vaccination. If so, is it ethical?

To me the answer is no it is not, but a paper from March of this year looked at this issue. Whilst this is four months or so old, it shows the mindset of the authors which I very much doubt has changed. Although the paper is a few months old, we basically had the same information on transmission, infection, hospitalisation and death as we do now.

Very often, the first author on a scientific paper makes the most contributions to the research work whilst the last author is the person responsible for the whole project. In this paper, published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, Christine Grady is the last author, meaning she was probably in charge of putting it together.

Who is Christine Grady? Christine is a bioethicist who is currently the head of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in the US. (the paper is also funded by the Intramural Research Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute). Does she have any conflicts of interest? A quick scan to the bottom of the paper tells us she doesn’t.


That’s good then, this should be an interesting, unbiased look at the ethics of encouraging vaccination.

Hold on a minute…who is Christine married to? Christine has been married to The Science (Anthony Fauci) since 1985. Sounds like a bit of a conflict of interest to me but I’m not the bioethicist so my ethics are probably all over the shot.

Anyway back to the paper. It begins by saying the pandemic has “hindered the ability of businesses to operate at full capacity because of threats of infection…In the interest of accelerating the resumption of normal operations and increasing productivity, many employers have considered steps to increase the vaccination rates of their employees”.

This Viewpoint explores the complex ethical contours of options for encouraging employee vaccination. We focus on strategies aimed at overcoming vaccine reluctance (which can be due to resistance, hesitance, misinformation, or inertia) to facilitate voluntary employee vaccination. We argue that while such practices may raise some privacy and autonomy concerns, there are ethically acceptable encouragement strategies available to employers.​

There are degrees of encouragement from distributing information to coercion and harassment.



Communication

The authors see it as a foregone conclusion that mass communication about vaccine safety and availability is “clearly acceptable”.

Emails should be sent that “not only [address] the individual benefits of receiving one of the approved vaccines, but also should reiterate employees’ responsibilities to help protect others. For example, emails and other forms of communication could describe ways that vaccination can help ensure a safe work environment, help protect the health of co-workers, and reduce the spread of disease in the larger community. These communications can and should emphasize the importance of employees not becoming vectors of transmission and the value of participating in a common effort to protect themselves and their communities.”

Mandates

On the other end of the spectrum, the authors find that “broad vaccine mandates can be ethically appropriate when applied neutrally, with clear articulation about the consequences of not complying with the policy”. They say that employers have the right to mandate vaccines in the same way as they have the right to prohibit indoor smoking.

Throughout the paper, the authors are keen to stress that all types of encouragement and mandates are ethically sound, so long as they don’t lead to coercion or harassment. But they gradually chip away at what coercion or harassment actually is. I would argue that even at the lower end of the spectrum, constantly sending messages about vaccination could be considered coercion and/or harassment.

Encouragement rises to the level of harassment when it is excessive and ongoing to the point of creating “a work environment that would be intimidating, hostile, or offensive to reasonable people”. In the context of supervisor and employee relationships, harassing actions involve a misuse of power imbalances that could create unacceptably hostile working conditions and undermine the voluntary nature of the vaccination.​

Encouragement

Targeted statistics are suggested to “spur competition or even implicitly embarrass vaccine resistors”. So long as the target audience can’t “easily” identify unvaccinated individuals then this is “ethically unproblematic”.

If the communication achieves its objective ethically, the possibility of harassment or coercion is low. Any pressure an individual may feel to get vaccinated would result from diffuse membership in a group rather than a fear about consequences targeted to a particular person.​

Trusted peers should “communicate with vaccine-hesitant or misinformed portions of the workforce… [to] help to dispel myths about vaccination and share their reasons for getting vaccinated”.

Because peers don’t have supervisory authority, this type of encouragement is not seen as ethically inappropriate.

Social consequences

Individuals who choose to make the workplace less safe for others through their vaccine refusal should be able to foresee the possibility of this kind of social consequence [stigma and ostracization], independent of peer engagement about the benefits of vaccination.​

Peers may tell unvaccinated employees “their desire to work with individuals who are vaccinated based on their expectation for a safe work environment and to avoid responsibilities falling disproportionately on vaccinated employees who can safely return in-person”.

Supervisors

As an example of the chipping away of their own rules, early in the paper the authors say peers not having supervisory authority makes encouragement ethically ok. But further into the paper, suddenly supervisors “ may legitimately need to ask about individual vaccination status (and legitimate exemptions) to provide important information about vaccine rates in a particular unit”.

Whilst supervisors should not make an individual feel pressured “this does not mean, however, that supervisors must immediately cut of a conversation after being told that an employee has not been vaccinated. If the employee is clearly amenable (if the person asks questions or requests assistance), the supervisor may ethically offer to provide information, answer questions or concerns, provide referrals to health care providers, and even facilitate arrangements for vaccination”.

The authors are concerned that supervisors may use vaccination status information to discriminate “but this does not preclude employers from making legitimate evidence-based policies about where to assign unvaccinated workers to minimize specific health risks”.

Ethical concerns for negative and positive incentives

Whilst noise is made about these concerns the authors conclude that modest incentives (cash payments, paid time off, free meals, spa services or product discounts) are acceptable unless they constitute undue inducement.

We stress that incentives resulting in individuals taking steps they would not otherwise have taken (deciding to get vaccinated) does not make them ‘undue.’ An incentive constitutes an undue inducement only when it “triggers irrational decision-making given the agent’s own settled (and reasonable) values and aims”. That is, is the incentive so attractive that it interferes with individuals’ abilities to make reasoned assessments of the risks and benefits associated with the activity?​

​

While there is no consensus about the amount of money or in-kind benefit that might have this effect, participation in clinical trials may commonly offer compensation in the thousands of dollars. In that situation, risks and, hence, concern over the potential for undue inducement are greater. In contrast, the COVID vaccines approved for emergency use in the United States have been demonstrated to be highly efficacious and exceedingly safe, based on hundreds of millions of doses administered. Thus, it is extremely unlikely that commonly proposed incentives in the $100–200 range would raise concern about individuals making decisions that are contrary to their interests.​

Easing restrictions

What about easing restrictions depending on vaccination status or vaccination rates in units?

Despite worries about a perception of unfairness, we argue that the selective easing of public health restrictions is ethically appropriate when done transparently and tied to objective public health guidance. Employees who choose not to get vaccinated should not slow down the gradual normalization of the work environment as the pandemic slowly subsides.​

Conclusion

The authors conclude that it is often ethically acceptable to “inform, encourage, strongly encourage, incentivize, and subtly pressure unvaccinated people to benefit them, the organization and other employees”.

They graciously say that employees “should recognise they may say no without important negative consequences”.

There is a fine line between resistible pressure and inappropriate harassment or coercion. The authors prefer not to define this line but say stronger encouragement is warranted where employees are required to come into the office or work with the public. If employees work from home then “employers may encourage them to get vaccinated for their own sake and the sake of their families and communities”.

Legal requirements are distinguished from ethical considerations and the authors say that “where legal precedents are not clear, companies may choose to focus on minimizing legal risks”. However, the authors tell employers to “resist that instinct because ethically defensible vaccine encouragement strategies are available”.

So whilst Fauci (The Science) is pushing multiple shots of vaccine, Fauci (The Ethics) is pushing companies to ignore legal risks and “encourage” employees to get vaccinated.

Only the other day, Mr.Fauci provided a stark warning for the unvaccinated. “If they don’t get vaccinated or they don’t get boosted, they’re going to get into trouble”.

To any employers reading the ethical considerations of Mrs. Fauci, I would suggest you ignore the whole paper except for the part which says “companies may choose to focus on minimizing legal risks”. However rare complication and side effects of the vaccines may be, you just never know how an employee will react. And if your employee has a bad reaction, all I can say is good luck and I hope your legal budget is big.
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Biden tests negative for COVID, isolating until 2nd negative

President Joe Biden's doctor says the 79-year-old president has tested negative for COVID-19 but will continue to isolate at the White House until a second negative test.

apnews.com

(fair use applies)


Biden tests negative for COVID, isolating until 2nd negative
By CHRIS MEGERIAN and ZEKE MILLER
yesterday

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden tested negative for COVID-19 on Saturday but will continue to isolate at the White House until a second negative test, his doctor said.

Dr. Kevin O’Connor wrote in his latest daily update that the president, “in an abundance of caution,” will abide by the “strict isolation measures” in place since his “rebound” infection was detected July 30, pending a follow-up negative result.

Biden, 79, came down with the virus a second time three days after he had emerged from isolation from his initial bout with COVID-19, reported on July 21. There have been rare rebound cases documented among a small minority of those, who like Biden, were prescribed the anti-viral medication Paxlovid, which has been proved to reduce the risk of serious illness and death from the virus among those at highest risk.

O’Connor wrote that Biden “continues to feel very well.”

Biden’s travel has been on hold as he awaited a negative test. He plans to visit Kentucky on Monday to view damage from catastrophic flooding and meet with families.

Biden was “doing great,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Saturday when asked about his health during her appearance in Las Vegas at a joint conference of the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. She said that when she speaks to the president, he tells her to “tell folks I’ve been working eight-plus hours a day

During his first go-around with the virus, Biden’s primary symptoms were a runny nose, fatigue and a loose cough, his doctor said at the time. During his rebound case, O’Connor said only Biden’s cough returned and had “almost completely resolved” by Friday.

Regulators are still studying the prevalence and virulence of rebound cases, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in May warned doctors that it has been reported to occur within two days to eight days after initially testing negative for the virus.

“Limited information currently available from case reports suggests that persons treated with Paxlovid who experience COVID-19 rebound have had mild illness; there are no reports of severe disease,” the agency said at the time.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Thousands stranded in China resort city amid COVID lockdown

Some 80,000 tourists are stranded in the southern Chinese beach resort of Sanya, after authorities declared it a COVID-19 hot spot and imposed a lockdown.

apnews.com

(fair use applies)


Thousands stranded in China resort city amid COVID lockdown
yesterday

BEIJING (AP) — Some 80,000 tourists are stranded in the southern Chinese beach resort of Sanya, after authorities declared it a COVID-19 hot spot and imposed a lockdown.

The restrictions came into force on Saturday morning, as authorities sought to stem the spread of COVID-19 in the city on tropical Hainan Island. There were 229 confirmed cases on Friday and an additional 129 on Saturday.

China’s ruling Communist Party sticks steadfastly to a “zero-COVID” approach that is increasingly at odds with the rest of the world. A recent outbreak in Shanghai spread so widely that authorities locked down the entire city, China’s largest, for two months, trapping millions of people and dealing a blow to the national economy.

Railway authorities banned all ticket sales in Sanya while all flights were also canceled on Saturday.

Tourists wanting to depart Sanya have to test negative for the coronavirus on five PCR tests over seven days, authorities said.

Meanwhile, hotels will offer guests a 50% discount during the lockdown period, a city official said during a news briefing.
The lockdown comes during a peak tourism season in Sanya, which is famous for its resorts and beaches.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

What is Paxlovid, the antiviral COVID treatment Biden took before his ‘rebound’ infection?

President Biden again tested positive for COVID-19 on Friday, marking the seventh day of a “rebound” infection he has experienced after taking the antiviral drug Paxlovid.

news.yahoo.com

(fair use applies)


What is Paxlovid, the antiviral COVID treatment Biden took before his ‘rebound’ infection?
Lissel-Thalia Devetori
Sat, August 6, 2022, 11:33 AM

President Biden tested negative for COVID-19 on Saturday, a day after he tested positive for the virus on what was the seventh day of his “rebound” infection. While the White House physician Kevin O’Connor said Biden “continues to feel very well," he is quarantining until he tests negative for a second time, out of an "abundance of caution."

The president first tested positive for COVID on July 21 and experienced mild symptoms. He took the five-day course of Pfizer’s antiviral drug Paxlovid and soon tested negative for the virus, clearing him to leave isolation. But around three days later, he tested positive once again.

Doctors say Biden is suffering a so-called “rebound” infection that is seen in a small percentage of people who take Paxlovid to treat COVID. The drug was authorized by the Food and Drug Administration in December.

What is Paxlovid?

According to the FDA, Paxlovid is an antiviral medication used to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 in adults and children ages 12 and older who weigh at least 88 pounds. Paxlovid is administered in three tablets, consisting of two medicines: two tablets of nirmatrelvir and one ritonavir tablet. The tablets are “taken together orally twice daily for five days, for a total of 30 tablets.”

O’Connor said in a memo this week that Biden’s cough was “almost completely resolved,” and that he continued to feel very well despite his rebound COVID-19 infection.

Why did the rebound occur?

In a series of tweets last week, White House COVID-19 coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha said “treatments like Paxlovid are designed to prevent serious illness. And they are doing that. Very well.”

He goes on to explain that in a Paxlovid rebound, “You get infected – get better (symptoms get better, antigen test negative) – then get worse. Could be new symptoms. Or it could be testing positive again – as the President has done.”

How often does rebound happen?

Jha said that according to data his team has been tracking from health systems, Paxlovid rebounds range “from 0.5% to 10%.”

The White House coordinator said it’s “important” to pay attention to rebound cases, “because when you rebound, you can potentially be contagious.” He added, however, that rebounding Paxlovid cases do “not seem to lead to serious illness (i.e. hospitalization, etc.), and that's key.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, said on MSNBC last week, "When you look at the studies, [rebound] generally does not occur very often.”

Fauci said that when he tested positive for the virus in June, he also experienced a COVID rebound after taking Paxlovid, with symptoms like a sore throat, runny nose and fever.

What are Biden’s rebound symptoms?

When he first tested positive during his rebound, Biden experienced no new symptoms, according to White House officials, who said he “tested positive on a routine test.”

This week, O’Connor said Biden was “still experiencing an occasional cough,” but on Friday, it was nearly gone. By Saturday, Biden tested negative for COVID.

Biden’s “temperature, pulse, blood pressure, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation remain entirely normal,” the White House physician said. “His lungs remain clear.”

In his Twitter thread, Jha said that because Biden is president, he is continuing to be tested after recovery, which Jha called “unusual” and “not what most Americans do.”

“We don’t know how often that happens," for people who both do and do not take Paxlovid, he said, and become "positive again after testing negative. Because we don’t have a lot of people testing after recovery. But we know from the clinical trials it happens.”

Who is eligible for Paxlovid, and should you take it?

Dr. Ghazala Sharieff, chief medical officer of acute care at Scripps Health, said not everyone who tests positive for COVID will be prescribed Paxlovid. Those who are eligible must test positive and have experienced symptoms within five days or less, and also be at higher risk for developing severe COVID symptoms.

Jha said that people at higher risk, for example those over 50 years old or who have chronic diseases, should get Paxlovid, because “it’ll dramatically reduce your risk of getting hospitalized or dying.”

Jha said the “bottom line” is that “Paxlovid is saving lives. Therapeutics are an essential part of fighting this pandemic. And way too many Americans are still dying of COVID. And when it comes to treatments like Paxlovid and monoclonals, we need to be using more of it, not less.”

 

[TammyinWI]

Mrs. Fauci has her fingers in the cookie jar. Jerks, her and her husband, and their comrades.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Blood clots, heart problems, kidney failure: COVID creates a higher risk for rare pediatric problems, new CDC study finds

Kids who've had COVID are also more likely to develop type 1 diabetes, an autoimmune condition that destroys the body's ability to make insulin, researchers found.

fortune.com

(fair use applies)


Blood clots, heart problems, kidney failure: COVID creates a higher risk for rare pediatric health problems, new CDC study finds
BYErin Prater
August 4, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

Children and teens who’ve had COVID are at greater risk for blood clots, heart problems, kidney failure, and Type 1 diabetes, according to a new report released Thursday by U.S. health officials.

Researchers with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention examined the electronic health records of nearly 800,000 U.S. children ages 0 through 17 who had COVID from 2020 through 2022, and compared them with that of nearly 2.5 million children who had not been diagnosed with COVID during the same time period.

They found that young people who had been diagnosed with COVID were about two times more likely to experience a blood clot in the lung—and nearly two times more likely to experience myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle; cardiomyopathy, a disease that makes it more difficult for the heart to function correctly; or blood clots in veins—in the year following their illness.

They were also roughly 1.3 times as likely to experience kidney failure, as well as Type 1 diabetes, an autoimmune disorder that destroys the pancreas’s ability to make insulin, according to the study.

Post-COVID conditions—defined as new or recurring health problems that occur four or more weeks after COVID infection, also known as “long COVID”—are poorly understood. Myriad efforts are underway to elucidate the condition—or multiple conditions. But such studies focus predominantly on adults, not children, according to the CDC.

COVID prevention strategies, including vaccination, are critical for preventing COVID, post-COVID conditions, and COVID-related diseases like MIS-C, or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. MIS-C patients fully recover from COVID, if they even had symptoms, and are fine for four to 12 weeks before developing a rare, inflammatory-based illness that can be fatal.

Up to one in five American adults who’ve had COVID-19 are living with long COVID, U.S. officials have recently stated. And an estimated 1 million Americans have been forced to leave the labor force because of medical complications from the nascent condition.

An estimated 5% to 10% of children who’ve had COVID go on to develop long COVID, Dr. Alexandra Brugler Yonts, an infectious disease specialist at Children’s National Hospital in Washington, D.C., told Fortune in May.

“People are like, ‘Oh, it’s only 5%,’ but we talk about death being 1% and it’s still a big deal,” she said.

At the lower end of that range are kids with “true long COVID, whatever that means,” she added. “We’re still figuring it out.”

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Here We Go: New CDC Study Claims Children and Teens with COVID are at Greater Risk for Blood Clots, Heart Problems, Kidney Failure, and Type 1 Diabetes - Did Not Include Vaccination Status in the Study | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Now they’re trying to blame Covid-19 for kids with blood clots!

www.thegatewaypundit.com

(fair use applies)


Here We Go: New CDC Study Claims Children and Teens with COVID are at Greater Risk for Blood Clots, Heart Problems, Kidney Failure, and Type 1 Diabetes – Did Not Include Vaccination Status in the Study
By Jim Hoft
Published August 6, 2022 at 1:05pm

Now they’re trying to blame Covid-19 for kids with blood clots!

After three years of the pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has made the theatrical claim that young individuals who have had COVID are at greater risk for blood clots, heart problems, kidney failure, and Type 1 diabetes, according to a report released on Thursday.

The CDC compared 781,419 US children and adolescents aged 0–17 years with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (patients with COVID-19) to 2,344,257 US children and adolescents without recognized COVID-19 (patients without COVID-19) between March 1, 2020 and January 31, 2022 using a large medical claims database.

“Post–COVID-19 (post-COVID) symptoms and conditions* are new, recurring, or ongoing health problems that occur 4 or more weeks after infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19),” the study stated. “Previous studies have characterized and estimated the incidence of post-COVID conditions among adults, but data among children and adolescents are limited.”

The researcher claimed that they found “increased incidence rates of several symptoms and conditions during the 31–365 days after a diagnosis of COVID-19 among children and adolescents aged 0–17 years.”

“The highest aHRs were associated with potentially serious conditions, such as acute pulmonary embolism, myocarditis and cardiomyopathy, venous thromboembolic event, acute and unspecified renal failure, and type 1 diabetes,” the study stated.

Take note that the vaccination status of patients was not included for this analysis. The question is how many of the kids and teens received the jab before the blood clots, heart disease, and other diseases showed up?

More from Fortune:

They found that young people who had been diagnosed with COVID were about two times more likely to experience a blood clot in the lung—and nearly two times more likely to experience myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle; cardiomyopathy, a disease that makes it more difficult for the heart to function correctly; or blood clots in veins—in the year following their illness.​

​

They were also roughly 1.3 times as likely to experience kidney failure, as well as Type 1 diabetes, an autoimmune disorder that destroys the pancreas’s ability to make insulin, according to the study.​

​

Post-COVID conditions—defined as new or recurring health problems that occur four or more weeks after COVID infection, also known as “long COVID”—are poorly understood. Myriad efforts are underway to elucidate the condition—or multiple conditions. But such studies focus predominantly on adults, not children, according to the CDC.​

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that children aged 5-11 have been contracting Covid at a higher rate if they have been fully vaccinated since February, which is the first time the agency recorded more vaccinated Covid cases than unvaccinated, according to data from CDC.

On Feb. 12, the CDC reported a weekly case rate among fully vaccinated children aged 5-11 of 250.02 per 100,000, compared to 245.82 among the unvaccinated children in the same age group.

Although the vaccines were billed as and promised to be ‘effective,’ they definitely aren’t living up to being anything close to it. Since February, the infection rate among vaccinated children 5-11 years old remained higher through June, which is the latest available data published – and things are trending in the wrong direction.

The elites are grooming you to believe everything causes SADS and diseases when we all know better, as reported by The Gateway Pundit.

Below is the list of articles reported by so-called health experts to explain the recent spike in SADS.

Notice what DIDN’T make the list!

The U.S. Sun: Urgent warning to gardeners as soil ‘increases risk of killer heart disease’

• “Medics found that pollutants in the soil could have a ‘detrimental effect on the cardiovascular system’. Writing in Cardiovascular Research, a journal of the European Society of Cardiology, the authors said soil pollutants include heavy metals, pesticides, and plastics. They state that contaminated soil could then lead to increasing oxidative stress in the blood vessels, which in turn leads to heart disease. Dirty soil can get into the blood stream, through inhalation.”

Daily Mail: Expert warns that shoveling snow can be a deadly way to discover underlying cardiovascular conditions as straining the heart with physical activity could cause sudden death

• “Dr John Bisognano, head of preventive cardiology at the University of Michigan Health Frankel Cardiovascular Center, warned that people who live stagnant lives could end up straining themselves to the point of death while shoveling snow. ‘Many people haven’t done a lot of exercise for the rest of the year and shoveling snow is not only a heavy exercise, but an exercise that really stresses the entire cardiovascular system,’ Bisognano said in a university release.“

Wales Online: Energy bill price rise may cause heart attacks and strokes, says TV GP

• “A doctor has warned that today’s huge hike in gas and electricity prices for 22million homes across the Uk could mean a rise in heart attacks and strokes. Dr Amir Khan spoke out on ITV’s Lorraine this morning, as he fears the huge new bills will have a devastating effect on people’s health. As a doctor, he said he knows he will see the effects on patients attending his GP practice.”

Wales Online: Sweating more than usual and at night could be a sign of heart attack

• “Sweating more than usual could be a sign of an impending heart attack, experts say. Night sweats are also a sign for women that they have heart issues. It’s well-known that heart attacks can be life-threatening and the sight of someone in a TV drama clutching their chest as they struggle for breath is a common one. However, in real life there are several early warning signs to be aware of.”

Health Line: Can Snoring Lead to Heart Failure?

• “Snoring is not only a noisy nuisance — it may also be a sign of sleep apnea. Not everyone who snores has this underlying condition. For those who do, snoring can lead to heart failure.”

CBS News: Watching less TV can reduce heart disease risk, research suggests

• “A new study finds that if we could limit our daily television viewing, we could reduce our risk of heart disease. They found that people who watched more than four hours of TV a day were at the greatest risk of developing heart disease while those who watched less than an hour of TV a day had a 16-percent lower rate. Interestingly, time spent using a computer did not appear to influence heart disease risk.”

Daily Mail: Entirely new kind of ‘highly reactive’ chemical is found in Earth’s atmosphere – and it could be triggering respiratory and heart diseases and contributing to global warming, scientists claim

• “Scientists have detected a new type of extremely reactive substance in the Earth’s atmosphere that could pose a threat to human health, as well as the global climate. The research team claims that the hydrotrioxides are likely to be able to penetrate into tiny airborne particles, known as aerosols, which pose a health hazard and can lead to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.”

The U.S. Sun: Summer holidays warning as flight delays increase risk of silent killers

• “Experts have now warned that the stress that builds up due to travel issues could be putting you at risk of silent killers. Superintendent pharmacist Abbas Kanani at ChemistClick said unexpected events such as grounded flights and refund issues could trigger physical changes in the body. He explained: “Holidaymakers deciding to sleep in airports, buy unhealthy meals and increase the consumption of alcohol when faced with continuous uncertainty could be at risk of high cholesterol which can lead to the life threatening condition, heart disease.”

Toronto Sun: Daylight savings may increase chance of heart disease, strokes: Studies

• “Scientific research has found that the transition to daylight saving time, could be linked to heart disease and strokes, according to a report from the American Heart Association.”

New Scientist: Taller people may have a higher risk of nerve, skin and heart diseases

• “Being taller may increase your risk of developing nerve, skin and some heart diseases, according to the largest study linking height and disease to date. The findings suggest that height could be used as a risk factor to prioritise screening tests for those at greatest risk of certain diseases.”

News Medical: Neighborhood ‘redlining’ may increase risk of cardiovascular diseases

• “The historical discriminatory housing policies known as “redlining” are associated with heart disease and related risk factors today in impacted neighborhoods, more than 60 years after they were banned, according to a study published today in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. Health disparities have been linked to a variety of socio-economic, environmental and social factors, and this study adds to growing evidence of the long-term cardiovascular impacts disparities can have on vulnerable populations.”

Medical News Today: What is the link between cold weather and heart attacks?

• “Cold weather exposure can increase the risk of cardiac responses, including heart attacks. This is because blood vessels respond to low temperatures by constricting, which increases blood pressure and reduces circulation, putting strain on the heart.”

New York Post: Falling asleep with the TV on could bring early death: study

• “Millions of Americans fall asleep each night in front of the TV — but a new study has found the practice could contribute to an early death. Researchers at the Northwestern University School of Medicine examined the impact of ambient light on the health and sleeping habits of 552 people between the ages of 63 and 84.”

New Scientist: Solar storms may cause up to 5500 heart-related deaths in a given year

• “Solar storms that disrupt Earth’s magnetic field may cause up to 5500 heart-related deaths in the US in some years. The sun goes through cycles of high and low activity that repeat approximately every 11 years.”

Express: Blood clots: How do you sleep? One position may increase the risk of deep vein thrombosis

• “Harvard Health writes: “Sleeping sitting up in a recliner […] could in some cases raise your risk of deep vein thrombosis. A blood clot in a limb can occur if your arms or legs are both bent motionless for hours. “But provided you are comfortable and can recline back slightly, there should be few risks to sleeping upright, assuming it doesn’t interfere with your ability to get a good night’s sleep.” Sleeping upright is not the only sleeping position with health risks, however. According to experts at Mayo Clinic, sleeping on the back can cause the tongue and jaw to slant down, crowding the airway.”

Times of India: Heart Attack: Study Says This Shower Habit Could Lead To A Heart Attack

• Even if someone is healthy, fit or young, cold water can trigger a heart attack by causing vasoconstriction (tightening of muscles around your blood vessels). Research has found that this usually happens in the hot weather, when people are more eager to immediately step into a cold water shower.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Joe Biden Tests Negative For Covid After a 7-Day 'Rebound' Case.... Will Continue to Isolate | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

Joe Biden on Saturday tested negative for the China Coronavirus after a 7-day ‘rebound’ case.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

(fair use applies)


Joe Biden Tests Negative For Covid After a 7-Day ‘Rebound’ Case…. Will Continue to Isolate
By Cristina Laila
Published August 6, 2022 at 12:45pm


Joe Biden on Saturday tested negative for the China Coronavirus after a 7-day ‘rebound’ case.

Biden, 79, will continue to isolate at the White House until his second negative antigen test.

“The President continues to feel very well,” Do. O’Connor wrote on Saturday.

Biden will continue to isolate at the White House despite the negative Covid test.

“This morning, his SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing was negative,” the White House physician said. “In an abundance of caution, the President will continue his strict isolation measures pending a second negative test as previously described.”

Joe Biden is almost 80 years old and the White House physician refuses to hold a press conference to discuss Biden’s ongoing health challenges.

Biden has been isolating at the White House for more than a week and his physician is MIA.

Joe Biden was last seen on the White House balcony as he stumbled through remarks.

Biden hid his eyes behind his signature aviators.

He looked weak as walked away from the lectern.

Biden didn’t even know what he was signing! He had to read from his notecards!

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Biden administration planning to extend Covid emergency declaration

The decision is not final, however. And it comes as some officials say it may be time to let it lapse.

www.politico.com

(fair use applies)


Biden administration planning to extend Covid emergency declaration
The decision is not final, however. And it comes as some officials say it may be time to let it lapse.
By Adam Cancryn and David Lim
08/06/2022 07:00 AM EDT

The Biden administration is expected to extend the Covid-19 public health emergency once again, ensuring that federal measures expanding access to health coverage, vaccines and treatments remain in place beyond the midterm elections, three people with knowledge of the matter told POLITICO.

The planned renewal follows extensive deliberations among Biden officials over the future of the emergency declaration, including some who questioned whether it was time to let the designation lapse.

Under the proposed extension, the Department of Health and Human Services would continue the declaration beyond the November elections and potentially into early 2023 — pushing the U.S. into its fourth calendar year under a Covid public health emergency.

“Covid is not over. The pandemic is not over,” one senior Biden official said. “It doesn’t make sense to lift this [declaration] given what we’re seeing on the ground in terms of cases.”

An HHS spokesperson declined to comment, and the people with knowledge of the matter cautioned the situation could still change ahead of an Aug. 15 deadline for deciding whether to let the declaration continue.

The Biden administration has increasingly pointed to the availability of Covid vaccines and treatments as evidence that Americans who are vaccinated and boosted can live with the virus in relative safety. But even with that new posture, many administration health officials remain wary of the message that ending the public health emergency declaration would send at a time when caseloads are topping 100,000 a day.

“It will end whenever the emergency ends,” one senior administration official said, summing up the internal attitude toward the declaration.

The emergency designation has also provided authorities that allowed the administration to expand access to Medicaid, greenlight vaccines more quickly and offer tests and therapeutics for free. Were the emergency to be ended, those flexibilities would need to be unwound — a complex process that hospital and public health groups have warned could be disruptive to their ability to treat Covid patients.

The federal government has continuously renewed the declaration since the first Covid cases hit the U.S. in January 2020.

And while HHS has pledged to give states 60 days’ notice before allowing it to expire, the administration has refused to set out specific criteria for phasing out its emergency authorities.

The debate around continuing the declaration, however, has grown more contentious. With vaccines and treatments widely distributed and no remaining expectation the administration can eradicate Covid, health officials over the last several months have increasingly discussed when that phase-out should occur, and what it should look like.

In the most recent round of deliberations, some officials have floated allowing the declaration to expire in October, contingent on the administration successfully rolling out its next round of vaccines and averting a fall surge in cases, two people familiar with the matter said. An end of the emergency declaration this year could also provide a pre-election demonstration that the country has, indeed, entered a new phase of the pandemic fight.

But such a move would likely spark fierce pushback from the health industry and invite criticism from public health groups on the front lines of efforts to combat the virus and vaccinate more Americans.

Some health officials also feared that formally ending the public health emergency would dampen any remaining sense of urgency in Congress to allocate additional money toward the Covid response. The administration’s request for billions more dollars to bolster its stockpiles of vaccines, tests and treatments has stalled for months in the Senate, even as officials warn the funding shortage risks hampering their ability to continue the pandemic fight.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Covid has settled into a persistent pattern — and remains damaging. It may not change anytime soon

Our tussle with Covid-19 — after a harrowing introduction and then wave upon wave of infections — seems to have settled into a persistent pattern. It may stay that way for a while.

www.statnews.com

(fair use applies)


Covid has settled into a persistent pattern — and remains damaging. It may not change anytime soon
By Andrew Joseph
Aug. 4, 2022

Our tussle with Covid-19 — after a harrowing introduction and then wave upon wave of infections — seems to have settled into a persistent pattern. It may stay that way for a while.

While Covid is not nearly the threat it once was, transmission of the coronavirus remains at sky-high levels. At the same time, the death rate has dropped thanks to vaccinations and improved treatments, and the overwhelming majority of people in the United States have developed some level of protection, from shots, a previous infection, or some combination of the two.

In some ways, Covid is increasingly looking like other respiratory infections — mild in many people, but sometimes severe in certain high-risk populations.

Ann Falsey, an infectious disease physician at the University of Rochester, is treating Covid patients who are generally elderly, have compromised immune systems, or have serious heart or lung conditions — the same types of people who get hospitalized from the seasonal bugs that most of us shake off.

“It doesn’t remotely look like Covid in someone who’s immunologically naive,” Falsey said, recalling how before vaccines were available people flooded hospitals with cases of widespread pneumonia that are far less common now.

Falsey has studied other respiratory viruses for years, including the four seasonal coronaviruses that cause a decent chunk of common colds. In one 2013 paper focused on two of those viruses, OC43 and 229E, Falsey and colleagues noted that, while they often just caused mild or even asymptomatic infections, they could still occasionally result in hospitalization and death, particularly among the elderly.

In a best-case scenario, perhaps that’s the long-term impact of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

What remains different for now, however, is that SARS-2 is still killing hundreds of Americans each day.

Average daily deaths have rarely dipped below 300 since last summer. More recently, as the latest Omicron subvariant BA.5 fueled another burst of transmission on top of an elevated plateau of cases, deaths have surpassed 400 a day (though the BA.5 wave appears to have crested). Such levels are far higher than those seen with other respiratory viruses, especially in the summer.

“It’s something that, because we’ve been in this pandemic for so long, we can easily get jaded to,” said Jonathan Abraham, an infectious diseases physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

Perhaps more worrisome is the fact that many experts don’t foresee much change anytime soon. While there will be ups and downs, some forecasts project 100,000 annual Covid deaths, if not more, for the next several years. Ignoring seasonal variation, that’s some 275 deaths a day.

“It’s hard for me to see, barring any massive change in the way we’re treating the virus right now or trying to manage it, that anything inherent to the virus is really going to change much,” said Stephen Kissler, an epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “We’re going to continue to see the emergence of variants, we’re going to continue to see spread outside the winter months, we’re probably going to see more spread in winter months in temperate regions — basically any time people are crowding indoors.”

What that means, Kissler said, is that going forward, Covid could generate two to three bad flu seasons’ worth of deaths each year.

That won’t necessarily be the case forever. Many experts see SARS-2 retreating to something more on par with the other human coronaviruses as we keep building up additional layers of immunity. But how long that process takes — three years? five years? 10 years? — remains an open question.

“What are we looking at and how long is this going to go on?” said Vineet Menachery, a coronavirus specialist at the University of Texas Medical Branch. “Is this just how we have to deal with it going forward or is there some relief in sight? I think the honest answer is, we just don’t know. We haven’t seen anything quite like this.”

Beyond deaths, the current level of illness is nothing to shrug off. Mass infections are both disruptive to society and result in an untold number of cases of long Covid.

Experts note there’s room for improvement with available tools, both by vaccinating those who have not yet rolled up their sleeves and who still account for a sizable chunk of deaths, and by reaching more people with booster shots. U.S. health officials are also still trying to expand access to and uptake of Covid therapies — both those that are given to infected people, like the antiviral Paxlovid that President Biden took during his recent bout, and a treatment called Evusheld, which is given to immunocompromised people who aren’t infected to prevent illness.

But a key reason why the country is still recording several hundred Covid deaths a day is simply because so many infections are occurring. Though there have been regional ebbs and flows, national case counts since mid-May have been greater than 100,000 a day, increasing to 130,000 recently. This is also a massive undercount, given that surveillance efforts have been rolled back and many people either forgo tests or use them at home.

With hundreds of thousands of cases a day, even the small and shrinking percentage of them that result in deaths can add up to hundreds of deaths a day.

So why then, two and a half years into the pandemic, is transmission still so high?

First off, SARS-2 — especially its Omicron variants — has become an incredibly infectious virus, far more so than some other respiratory viruses. The mitigation measures that people carried well into last year, like masking and distancing, have also broadly been cast aside.

At the same time, prior infections don’t protect us from getting reinfected all that well. Neither do vaccinations, although these continue to provide robust protection against severe disease. This is a result of both waning immunity and the mutations different variants have picked up.

It’s not that recovering from an infection or getting a jab provides no protection against future infection. While some reinfections have been documented after just a few weeks, recent studies from Qatar, Portugal, and Israel have all underscored that, generally, people who had recent infections or shots were less likely to become infected. But that type of immunity doesn’t seem all that durable and doesn’t reduce the risk of infection to zero. Essentially, the virus is still finding plenty of people to infect.

All this can help fuel a nasty cycle, too: The more the virus is spreading, the higher the likelihood that better-spreading variants emerge, which can in turn only accelerate transmission.

Even with a virus as infectious as SARS-2, one that is going to burn through huge numbers of people each year, many experts still see us stabilizing into a better place over time.

Many of us, between infections and vaccines, have had three, perhaps four, maybe even five encounters with the virus or its spike protein. It could be that we need even more exposures to really tame the virus.

“If you get infected over and over again, and it seems like that’s going to be the case — in part because of viral evolution and in part because of waning immunity — that secondary, tertiary, quaternary, those repeated infections are probably not going to be as damaging,” said evolutionary biologist Katia Koelle of Emory University.

Those repeated exposures — especially to different variants — should elicit deeper and broader immunity, with a stronger arsenal of fighters like antibodies and T cells, Koelle said. We might still get infected by SARS-2 dozens of times over our lifetimes — just as with the coronaviruses that cause the common cold — but in most instances, it will cause only a case of the sniffles. (In rare events, subsequent infections may make people sicker than earlier cases.)

The repeated training of the immune system in the form of booster shots is particularly important for older people, who have a harder time building up an immune armamentarium against a novel pathogen and see their defenses wane faster than younger people. But over time, people will scale up their immunity when they are younger and carry that with them as they age. People who are 60 now may not be as vulnerable to Covid when they’re 75 as people who are 75 now.

Perhaps our deeper immunity will even extend to a more durable protection against infection, or make us less likely to further spread the virus. With the four seasonal coronaviruses, it’s thought that protection against infection lasts a year or two, though these viruses haven’t been as well studied as SARS-2.

“Is there a threshold amount of immunity that will protect you” against infection? Menachery said. “If you had asked me that two years ago, I would have thought a vaccine and an infection might have been enough. We’re seeing that that’s not enough at this point,” he said, though he added the reason for that is unclear. Is it that the virus has mutated enough to overcome the immune barriers we’ve been able to erect thus far?

All the experts STAT spoke to for this story stressed that predicting the future with SARS-2 is fraught. There are factors they know they can’t predict, such as how the virus will continue to evolve. Will future variants emerge from the drifting of Omicron like we’ve seen throughout 2022, or will something unexpected, like when Omicron appeared, undercut our immunity?

We, as the virus’s host, could also have a trick up our sleeves. The government is planning on rolling out updated Omicron-targeting booster shots this fall, specifically with a component of the BA.5 subvariant, which now accounts for 85% of U.S. infections. Even if some other Omicron sublineage becomes dominant by then, the shots could be a better match against what’s circulating than the original formulation — and could help bolster protection against infection, and in turn act as a drag on transmission.

The updated shot will combine the BA.5 component with the original vaccines that targeted the virus’s spike protein from early 2020. Training the immune system on two variants can lead to a broader response generally, said Meagan Deming, a virologist and infectious diseases physician at the University of Maryland.

“Hopefully that breadth of immunity will cover whatever [variant] comes next,” Deming said. “And hopefully we can shut down transmission a little bit this fall. We’ll see.”

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Are Health Officials Backtracking on COVID-19 Narratives?

www.theepochtimes.com

(fair use applies)



Are Health Officials Backtracking on COVID-19 Narratives?
BY Health 1+1 and Marina Zhang
August 6, 2022

Health officials have been making headlines in the news for their recent comments that seem to be reversing previous COVID-19 public health messages.

Both Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and former White House COVID-19 advisor Dr. Deborah Birx, admitted that the COVID-19 vaccines are not particularly capable at preventing infection, reversing previous COVID-19 narratives that asserted the vaccine prevented disease acquisition and transmission.

Birx said on Fox News July 22, that she “knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection…I think we overplayed the vaccines.”

This is a significant fallback considering that she promoted Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines when both were granted emergency use authorization in late 2020.

“This is one of the most highly-effective vaccines we have in our infectious disease arsenal. And so that’s why I’m very enthusiastic about the vaccine,” Birx said on an ABC podcast at the time.

On that podcast, she made no mention of concerns the vaccines might not protect against infection.

Fauci and Birx also made statements showing their “open” minds regarding a laboratory leak as a possible explanation for the original source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

It appears that the messaging around COVID-19 health policies is opening up, or is it?

Changing Narrative Around COVID-19 Vaccines

Public health messaging regarding effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines has shifted throughout the two years of the pandemic.

“I think the whole COVID-19 vaccine program was over promised and it was too broadly applied. No vaccine against respiratory illness has been very effective in the history of medicine,” Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist and co-author of The Courage to Face COVID-19 told The Epoch Times during a phone call.

He reasoned that the reversals by Fauci and Birx were to negate the broad claims health officials made at the start of the pandemic.

“The first claim was that the vaccine would stop the virus and people wouldn’t get sick if they got the virus. That’s never happened with an influenza vaccine or pneumococcal vaccine,” McCullough said.

Even the American President Joe Biden claimed that the vaccine stopped people from getting COVID-19. His comments were later fact-checked by the Associated Press for exaggeration.

“The next false claim is that the vaccines wouldn’t stop transmission,” said McCullough.

In a statement released on March 2021, a few months after the initial vaccine rollout, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the vaccination program “interrupted chains of transmission.”

However, papers were soon published showing that the amount of virus detected in vaccinated and unvaccinated people was the same. Since viral load is analogous to infectiousness, this finding indicated that transmission rates would be same regardless of vaccination status.

The director of the CDC Rochelle Walensky later released a statement in June 2021 stating that vaccines do not stop transmission.

McCullough said that health officials are now down to their last few false claims including that the vaccines prevent hospitalization and death.

In the approval announcement for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, the Food and Drug Administration wrote that “the vaccine is effective in preventing COVID-19 and potentially serious outcomes including hospitalization and death.”

In New South Wales, a state in Australia, over 96 percent of people over 16-years-old have received two COVID-19 vaccine doses, of which, 69 percent have received a third dose. However, the state’s health statistics show that the majority of hospitalization, ICU admissions, and deaths have occurred in the vaccinated demographic (pdf), with the majority occurring in people who had three or four vaccinations.

“There’s never been a randomized trial where hospitalization and death have been reduced by the vaccine…the only thing we’ve had is a series of biased papers that don’t account for prior immunity or for early treatment [which reduces hospitalization and death],” said McCullough.

Despite findings from other countries that indicate that the vaccine may not be reducing hospitalization and mortality risks, this claim has persisted in the United States.

Dr. Pierre Kory, a pulmonologist and critical care specialist, and the president and chief medical officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, gave an anecdotal explanation for why the hospitalization agenda is still going strong.

“When a patient enters a hospital and they show their [COVID-19] vaccine card…although they (the hospital) will enter the data of the vaccine card, it’s (the vaccination status is) buried in a nursing note. On the main screen, which categorizes them as vaccinated or unvaccinated, in many of the systems they go in as unknown,” Kory told The Epoch Times.

The few patients that do get submitted as “vaccinated” are those that got vaccinated by a doctor in that healthcare system.

“So I will tell you that the vast majority of patients in the hospital have an unknown vaccination status, and that’s interpreted as unvaccinated, and that is why the CDC is constantly pumping out this data showing all this protection…I cannot prove that, although I’ve seen that with my own eyes, and I have colleagues who’ve seen it.”

A major narrative of COVID-19 vaccines that has seen changes is vaccine efficacy.

When initially released, both Pfizer and Moderna promised over 95 percent efficacy, with over 90 percent efficacy in stopping COVID-19 transmission and symptomatic infection 6 months after the second dose.

However, once the Delta and Omicron variants emerged, the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines waned dramatically.

Studies found that up to 6 months after the second dose, the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine against symptomatic infections dropped to 80 percent. Moderna dropped from 74 percent efficacy against the Alpha variant to 67 percent for Delta.

Once the Omicron variant arose, studies showed that efficacy against symptomatic infections fell to negative values six months after receiving two doses of either Moderna or Pfizer vaccines.

Backtracking on COVID-19 Messaging

Apart from vaccine usage, Fauci’s recent media commentary also contradicted previous messages on vaccine safety and COVID-19 immunity.

Both Fauci and Birx recently made news when they conceding that the vaccines were not very effective at preventing infection.

Fauci admitted that the vaccines do not protect “overly well,” against infection, though he argued that it offered good protection against severe disease.

Birx implied that the researchers knew from the beginning that the vaccine was not very effective at protecting against infection.

Kory said he was surprised at Birx’s admission, calling her concession a “small crack in their very consistent narrative.”

“They’ve employed multiple narratives, but this actually does backtrack on one of the original narratives…they’ve been saying for several months that the vaccines protected [against the virus], and now to hear that they knew that they weren’t, I think that’s pretty remarkable.”

Fauci also acknowledged the menstrual irregularities observed in vaccinated women.

“Well, the menstrual thing is something that seems to be quite transient and temporary, that’s one of the points,” Fauci said in an appearance on Fox News on July 25. “We need to study it more.”

His comments drew criticisms from obstetricians and gynecologists who have been observing severe cases of menstrual irregularities.

Dr. Christiane Northrup, a former fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists accused Fauci of discounting “the experience of thousands of women,” by dismissing the cases with “we need to study it more.”

“Unfortunately the menstrual problems we are seeing are far from transient and temporary. Many women have been bleeding daily or having heavy, irregular, painful periods for an entire year. And some of these are well past menopause.
Something is way off here,” she told The Epoch Times.

Kory speculated that Fauci’s small admissions are “tactical,” and dismissive rather than a sign to engage in open, and honest scientific discussion.

“I still think it’s in the service of covering up this catastrophe. They’ve been dead wrong on innumerable policies,” Kory said. “I don’t see this as any concerted effort to be more honest or to show more integrity.”

McCullough speculated that officials are “backtracking because they know that the data are overwhelming refuting the false claims, and that public opinion has turned against the vaccines.”

Congress and Senate inquiries into vaccine safety have also exerted pressure on the health agencies.

Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) released a statement on March 24, 2022 announcing that he had sent 36 letters to the federal health agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), FDA, CDC, and NIAID health officials on vaccine oversight.

McCullough disclosed that Johnson has since sent many more letters but has been “stonewalled” by the health agencies.

The same day the interview with Fox News was released, Fauci was also seen making a surprising acknowledgement on The Hill that natural immunity indeed protects against COVID-19, despite strong assertions from the CDC presenting vaccinated immunity as preferential and better.

“We were always aware that if you get infected, you have a degree of protection against reinfection,” Fauci remarked in the video released on July 25.

He later said that the protection afforded by natural immunity and vaccination “wanes over a period of time,” which is “very, very different” from other infections like polio, smallpox, and measles.

Fauci claimed that individuals who have been infected and vaccinated have the best protection, describing that phenomenon as “hybrid immunity.”

However, a study published on the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) has shown very little difference between infection reduction in hybrid immunity and natural immunity.

Dr. Tracy Høeg, a physician based in California and an consultant epidemiologist for the Department of Health in Florida, tweeted on June 23, 2022 that the NEJM shows that “natural immunity (A) provides greater protection than vax (B) against future infection, but it [the study] calls into question the very idea of “hybrid immunity;” an extra vax dose (C) doesn’t seem to add much to nat[ural] immunity.”

Yes, @dockaurG, this @NEJM article is great not only bc it shows natural immunity (A) provides greater protection than vax (B) against future infection, but it calls into question the very idea of "hybrid immunity":​

An extra vax dose (C) doesn't seem to add much to nat immunity https://t.co/3EB0ETKJuB pic.twitter.com/L2xZWv9BRo​

— Tracy Høeg, MD, PhD (@TracyBethHoeg) June 14, 2022​

Kory argued that despite Fauci’s shift in narrative from vaccinated immunity to hybrid immunity, the messaging “hasn’t changed.”

“[Rochelle] Walensky and Fauci have long been saying they believe that vaccination plus natural immunity is better than natural immunity. That’s not new.”

[continued next post]

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

[continued from post above]

Opening Up to Lab Theory and Lockdown Contradictions

Fauci also made other contradictory statements about keeping an “open mind” over claims that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have leaked from a Chinese lab, despite long-standing assertions that the virus was of natural origin.

“We have an open mind but it looks very much like this was a natural occurrence, but you keep an open mind,” Fauci told Fox News on July 23.

Similarly, Fauci also claimed that he never recommended lockdowns on The Hill’s “Rising” program.

“First of all, I didn’t recommend locking anything down,” Fauci said on the show, suggesting it had been a recommendation from the CDC.

However, in October 2020, Fauci publicly recommended that former President Donald Trump “shut the whole country down,” although it’s not clear what he meant, as presidents don’t have the authority to enact sweeping lockdowns.

“When it became clear that we had community spread in the country … I recommended to the President that we shut the country down,” he said in an event with students at the College of the Holy Cross in October 2020.

Fauci also publicly suggested multiple times in 2020 that bars and restaurants should remain closed, then arguing that there was a binary choice between opening schools or bars.

“You have a choice—either close the bars or close the schools. Because, if you have people congregating in bars, it’s likely you’re going to stay red,” the longtime head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said in November 2020.

Shift in Public Opinion and Policies For the Future

McCullough says he is observing changes in both public and professional discourse surrounding COVID-19 health policies and is hopeful that more changes are coming.

“I don’t see any celebration of the vaccines. None. There’s health freedom rallies going on all over the United States where people are advocating for their civil liberties…No one is out there advocating for the vaccines,” McCullough said.

Though vaccine uptake for adults has been strong with over 77 percent of Americans over 18 years old vaccinated, the recent vaccination for under-five-year-olds has seen very poor uptake.

“The very low uptake of childhood and young adult vaccination, I think is a proxy for Americans being very concerned about the lack of safety and the lack of justification for these vaccines,” said McCullough.
He also observed shifts in public opinion and guidelines on early treatment.

Since the start of the pandemic, McCullough and Kory have been active advocates for using ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as early treatments to prevent COVID-19 disease. Despite the CDC and the FDA pronouncing these drugs unsafe and not beneficial, emerging studies from other countries have found these off-label use drugs are remarkably beneficial in controlling COVID-19.

“The message on early treatment has gotten out. It largely was responsible for taking us off that big peak that we had in January of 2021,” said McCullough. “The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons is now coming up on two years of having a home treatment guide (pdf).”

However, McCullough argues that it may be too early to see big changes in health policies and reversal of previous decisions.

“This is very similar to the relationship between smoking and lung cancer. There was data that existed for about 40 years as originally proposed by Sir Austin Bradford Hill, an epidemiologist, who said, by good criteria, that smoking is causative for lung cancer. It was about 40 years before there was finally capitulation recognition,” said McCullough.

“The same is true with the vaccine program. We’re into our second year of it; it’s a complete failure. It’s causing great harm…and I anticipate it’s just too early for recognition and stopping the public harm.”

McCullough expected a shift in talking points as health agencies rollout “second generation” COVID-19 vaccines, stating that the second generation vaccines are going to be better and safer than the first.

Kory, however, was not optimistic for major changes.

“[Healthcare] agencies are largely working in the service of vaccine manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies. So repurposed drugs…have long been the natural enemy, essentially of the pharmaceutical industry, and they have spent decades attacking repurposed drugs,” Kory said.

“I have no evidence that that system is going to change…I would be shocked to see that the agencies support a repurposed drug.”

McCullough said that doctors are also catching wind of the inconsistencies in public health messaging. A survey conducted on 737 primary care physicians in the United States in May 2021 found that 10 percent of physicians were ‘not confident’ in vaccines in general and less than 10 percent reported ‘somewhat to no confidence’ in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

Physicians reporting ‘low confidence’ at around 30 percent for the J&J vaccine.

Nonetheless, a survey by the American Medical Association (AMA) showed that over 96 percent of doctors have received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine.

“The vast majority of doctors were tricked into taking the vaccine. They want to believe that it’s safe…that it’s effective…so the doctors are having a hard time recognizing vaccine injuries because of the psychological fear of them understanding that the vaccine is in their body,” concluded McCullough.

Zachary Stieber, Jack Phillips, Enrico Trigoso, and Rita Li contributed to this report.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGCZ-pPE-UE
Covid optimism
19 min 40 sec
Aug 6, 2022
Dr. John Campbell

Right now there is no obvious replacement for the BA.5 variant, that is causing the current wave. This leaves open the real possibility that this could be the last significant wave this year, (or hopefully much longer). https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trac... BA.5 85.5% BA.4 7.7% BA.4.6 4.1 BA2.12.1 2.6% BA.2 0.1% BA.1s 0% BA. 2.75 not US listed US hospitalizations Down 3.8% on the week Known daily case counts, test positivity, hospitalizations slow downward trend US deaths https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trac... Last 7 days rolling average, 393 per day Dr. Fauci (81), Re. BA.5 https://www.washingtonpost.com/health... If they don’t get vaccinated or they don’t get boosted, they’re going to get into trouble Wants to increase vaccination and booster rates, so the virus does not have, ample opportunity to freely circulate It is about you as an individual, but it’s also about the communal responsibility to get this outbreak under control (POTUS, fully vaccinated and double boosted) Weekly national Influenza and COVID-19 surveillance report https://assets.publishing.service.gov... COVID-19 activity decreased Highest number of respiratory incidents, (mostly SARS-CoV-2) in care homes Influenza positivity, 0.5% RSV positivity up to 6.5% overall RSV positivity in under 5s, 22.2% Rhinovirus positivity, down to 8.4% Symptom tracker data https://health-study.joinzoe.com/data New cases per day, 145,740 Current prevalence, 2,858,159 UK official data https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk ONS latest https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati... 3.86% in England (1 in 25 people) 3.58% in Wales (1 in 30 people) 5.98% in Northern Ireland (1 in 17) 4.95% in Scotland (1 in 20) Long covid, as of 2 July 2022 1.8 million people, (2.8% of the population) Of those, 81% experiencing long COVID symptoms at least 12 weeks 43% at least one year Antibodies 179ng/ml level and the 800ng/ml theshold

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

“Time Expansion” – Our Perception of Time Has Slowed

In the early stages of the epidemic, the majority of those who were confined to their homes said that they felt that time moved more slowly and that they felt lonely as a result. According to a report in the journal Science Advances, the COVID-19 pandemic has altered how individuals perceive the

scitechdaily.com

(fair use applies)


“Time Expansion” – Our Perception of Time Has Slowed
By FAPESP
August 6, 2022

In the early stages of the epidemic, the majority of those who were confined to their homes said that they felt that time moved more slowly and that they felt lonely as a result.

According to a report in the journal Science Advances, the COVID-19 pandemic has altered how individuals perceive the passing of time.

The majority of research participants (65%) reported feeling that time was moving more slowly at the conclusion of the first month of social isolation, which occurred in May 2020. This perception was termed by the researchers as “time expansion,” and they discovered that it was linked to feelings of isolation and a lack of enjoyable activities throughout the time period.

Even more people (75%) said they didn’t experience as much “time pressure,” which is the sensation that time is passing more quickly and leaving less time for activities of daily living and recreation. 90% of those surveyed claimed they were taking shelter at home during that time.

“We followed the volunteers for five months to see if this ‘snapshot’ of the start of the pandemic would change over time. We found that the feeling of time expansion diminished as the weeks went by, but we didn’t detect significant differences with regard to time pressure,” André Cravo, first author of the article, told Agência FAPESP. Cravo is a professor at the Federal University of ABC in São Paulo state, Brazil.

The research started on May 6, when 3,855 participants recruited via social media responded to a ten-item online questionnaire and completed a simple task meant to test their ability for short interval estimation (pressing start and stop buttons in 1, 3, and 12 seconds). They were then questioned about their daily activities the week before (including whether they had finished all required tasks and how much time they had set aside for leisure) as well as how they were feeling right now (happy, sad, lonely, etc).

“They were invited to return every week for further sessions, but not everyone did,” Cravo said. “In the final analysis, we considered data for 900 participants who answered the questionnaire for at least four weeks, albeit not all consecutively.”

Using time awareness scales from 0 to 100 that are standard for this type of survey, the researchers analyzed the answers and calculated the two parameters – time expansion and time pressure – to see whether they increased or decreased week by week.

“Besides a rise or fall on the scales, we also analyzed the factors that accompanied the changes. During the five-month period, we observed a similar pattern: in weeks when participants reported feeling lonely and experiencing less positive affect, they also felt time pass more slowly. In highly stressful situations, they felt time pass more quickly,” Cravo said.

When the first set of answers to the question on the passage of time was compared with the second, provided at the end of the first month of confinement, perceptions of time expansion had risen 20 points while time pressure had fallen 30 points, according to Raymundo Machado, a scientist at the Brain Institute of the Albert Einstein Jewish Hospital (HIAE) in São Paulo, and last author of the article. “These results are evidently affected by memory bias, however, because no measurements were made before the pandemic,” he said.

Time slowed most for younger participants early in the pandemic, when compliance with social distancing rules was strictest. Except for age, demographic factors such as household size, occupation, and gender, had no influence on the results.

For the authors, this may be an effect of the sample profile. Most of the volunteers (80.5%) lived in the Southeast region. A large majority were women (74.32%). Most had completed secondary school, and a great many even had a university degree (71.78%). In terms of income, roughly a third were upper middle class (33.08%). Sizable minorities worked in education (19.43%) and healthcare (15.36%).

“This is typical of online surveys, where a majority are women living in the Southeast with high levels of formal education. The influence of demographics might have been more evident if the sample had represented the Brazilian population better,” Machado said.

Internal clock
Although the pandemic changed participants’ perceptions of the passage of time, it apparently did not affect their ability to sense duration, measured by the button-pressing task. “All of us are able to estimate short intervals. When the results of this time estimation test [including overestimation and underestimation of the intervals] were compared with the time awareness scores, there was no correlation,” Machado said.

According to Cravo, evidence from the scientific literature suggests the feeling that time is passing more slowly or more quickly is influenced mainly by two factors: the relevance of time in a particular context, and unpredictability. “For example, if you’re late for work [so that time is relevant in the context] and have to wait for a bus [unpredictable timing], you have an extreme perception that the minutes aren’t passing. When you’re on vacation and having fun, time isn’t relevant and appears to fly,” he said.

The perception often changes when we recall past situations. “When you remember what you did during a vacation, time seems to have lasted longer. On the contrary, when you’re standing in line, time goes all too slowly but when you recall the situation sometime later, it feels as if it was over quickly,” Cravo said.

In the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, how people will remember the passage of time during the period of social distancing is unknown. “Several temporal milestones, such as Carnival, the June festivals, and birthdays, had to be skipped in the last two years, so the question remains open,” he concluded.

Reference: “Time experience during social distancing: A longitudinal study during the first months of COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil” by André Mascioli Cravo, Gustavo Brito de Azevedo, Cristiano Moraes Bilacchi Azarias, Louise Catheryne Barne, Fernanda Dantas Bueno, Raphael Y. de Camargo, Vanessa Carneiro Morita, Esaú Ventura Pupo Sirius, Renan Schiavolin Recio, Mateus Silvestrin and Raymundo Machado de Azevedo Neto, 13 April 2022, Science Advances.

DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abj7205

The study was funded by FAPESP.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Paxlovid Escape Mutations?

President Biden's two and a half-week Covid-19 marathon

rwmalonemd.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Paxlovid Escape Mutations?
President Biden's two and a half-week Covid-19 marathon
Robert W Malone MD, MS
10 hr ago

President Biden continues to harbor the COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) in his body. He first contracted COVID-19 on July 21, two and a half weeks before the present. Is this because of immunosuppression - due to his heavily boosted status, or for some other reason? That being said, the single antiviral drug regime of Paxlovid may also be causing the virus to stay in his body for a long time, an effect otherwise referred to as “the rebound” effect:

“The hypothesis is that the immune system didn’t have a chance to see the full extent of the virus, since Paxlovid suppressed replication early in disease,” Dr. Roberts says. Scientists are studying the effects of longer treatment durations, longer periods of isolation, and other ways of managing the problem, he adds. (Scott Roberts, MD, a Yale Medicine infectious diseases specialist.)​

I believe that the word “rebound” is a misnomer in this context. The virus has never left President Biden’s body. It is still circulating, it was just at a fairly undetectable level for a while. What could possibly go wrong? Oh, I know! Viruses resistant to Paxlovid are spawned, the virus population explodes and then the “rebound” effect is observed -only this time with Paxlovid resistant strains.

Paxlovid manufacturer Pfizer and the Food and Drug Administration have both acknowledged reports of rebound COVID-19 cases associated with the drug.​

This is truly the worst case scenario for a single mechanism of action drug used as a therapy against COVID-19, as described in more detail below.

But it isn’t just that Paxlovid causes the virus to stick around for weeks on end, it doesn’t work very well either: “Warning! Biden’s Pushing Paxlovid, the Pfizer Flop Drug”

Upon launch, Pfizer said their new anti-viral drug Paxlovid cut hospitalization and death by 90%. An updated, more recent analysis from 1,153 patients (out of a possible 2,246 patients) showed a lackluster, non-significant 51% relative risk reduction.​

​

A sub-group analysis of 721 vaccinated adults with at least one risk factor for progression to severe COVID-19 showed a non-significant relative risk reduction in hospitalization or death (treatment arm: 3/361; placebo: 7/360).​

How can we control SARS-CoV-2’s evolution of resistance to drugs?

SARS-CoV-2 (the cause of COVID-19) is an RNA virus, just like HIV is an RNA virus. RNA viruses evolve very rapid and have a lot of genetic mutations. And just like HIV, the COVID-19 virus evolves so quickly that it evolves right out from under single “mechanism of action” (single agent) drug therapy. When a patient begins taking Paxlovid, it appears that the drug keeps many of the viruses from reproducing. Because some of the new mutations happen to have a certain level of resistance to the drug, some viruses do survive. Because of COVID-19’s speedy evolution, the virus responds to selection pressures quickly. So, viruses that happen to survive the drug are favored and then resistant virus strains evolve within the patient. When a patient is immunosuppressed and doesn’t clear the virus (as seems to be happening with Paxlovid), then this evolution has a longer runway to evolve before the virus is cleared by the body. These new strains are then spread through out the population. So, other people can contract the escape mutant resistant lineage. A new variant is born.

When HIV single dose therapies failed, physicians soon realized that basic evolutionary theory leads to a solution from this dilemma. That is evolution of resistant viral strains can be delayed by prescribing a multi-drug therapy. That is why so many early, multi-drug treatment COVID-19 docs use drug cocktails.

So why is it, that the FDA, knowing this - did not chose to exclude immunocompromised individuals from using the drug?

Severely immunocompromised patients can experience prolonged periods of SARS-CoV-2 replication, which may lead to rapid viral evolution. There are theoretical concerns that using a single antiviral agent in these patients may produce antiviral-resistant viruses. Additional studies are needed to assess this risk. The role of combination antiviral therapy or a longer treatment duration in treating severely immunocompromised patients is not yet known.​

Right now, patients consuming the Pfizer drug as a single agent therapeutic are increasing the risk of spawning resistant escape mutant variants. If you want a case example of how this works - just look to President Biden and his current treatment plan. That is, round three of the current treatment plan. That is two and a half weeks of having circulating virus in his body. That virus is busy evolving to escape the drug and/or his vaccine.

Now, what we learned also from HIV is that the virus mutates so rapidly, that it evolves so quickly, that it evolves right out from under vaccines - particularly in immunosuppressed patients, who do not rapidly clear the virus. Then vaccine escape mutants are generated with are resistant to the vaccine. So, the fact that Paxlovid is prolonging the virus in the body can only lead to more vaccine escape mutants.

One might think that Pfizer and Moderna wanted to prolong this outbreak…

Naw, that would be too cynical, even for them, right?

“I think some clinicians have unfortunately written off Paxlovid as not a good option for patients who would very much benefit from it based on what is a misperception that it doesn’t work or doesn’t do a good job,” said Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health. “I just worry that we are robbing people of an important tool.”​

I just worry that public health officials won’t bother to actually read the scientific literature, understand what an effective drug does and learn some basic principles about virology.

When will they ever learn?

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Groupthink: we are all victims

US HHS response to COVID was textbook, in all the wrong ways

rwmalonemd.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Groupthink: we are all victims
US HHS response to COVID was textbook, in all the wrong ways
Robert W Malone MD, MS
11 hr ago

“Madness is the exception in individuals but the rule in groups.”
Fredrich Nietzsche

We all seek to understand the root causes of the COVIDcrisis. We crave an answer, and hope is that we can find some sort of rationale for the harm that has been done, something that will help make sense out of one of the most profound policy fiascos in the history of the United States. In tracing the various threads which seem to lead towards comprehension of the larger issues and processes, there has been a tendency to focus on external actors and forces. Examples include the Medical-Pharmaceutical Industrial complex, the World Health Organization, the World Economic Foundation, the Chinese Central Communist Party, the central banking system/Federal Reserve, the large “hedge funds” (Blackrock, State Street, Vanguard), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Corporate/social media and Big Technology, the Trusted News Initiative, and the United Nations.

In terms of the inexplicable behavior of the general population in response to the information which bombards all of us, the denialism and seeming hypnosis of colleagues, friends and family, Mattias Desmet’s 21st century update of the work of Hannah Arendt , Joost Meerloo, and so many others is often cited as the most important text for comprehending the large scale psychological processes which have driven much of the COVIDcrisis madness. Dr. Desmet, a professor of clinical psychology at Ghent University (Belgium) and a practicing psychoanalytic psychotherapist, has provided the world with guide to the Mass Formation process (Mass formation Psychosis, Mass Hypnosis) which seems to have influenced so much of the madness that has gripped both the United States as well as much of the rest of the world.

But what about the internal psychological processes at play within the United States HHS policy making group? The group which has been directly responsible for the amazingly unscientific and counterproductive decisions concerning bypassing normal bioethical, regulatory and clinical development norms to expedite genetic vaccine products (“Operation Warp Speed”), suppressing early treatment with repurposed drugs, mask and vaccine mandates, lockdowns, school closures, social devision, defamation and intentional character assassination of critics, and a wide range of massively disruptive and devastating economic policies. All have lived through these events, and have become aware of the many lies and misrepresentations (subsequently contradicted by data) which have been walked back or historically revised by Drs. Fauci, Collins, Birx, Walensky, Redfield, and even Mr. Biden. Is there a body of scholarship and academic literature which can help make sense of the group dynamics and clearly dysfunctional decision making which first characterized the “coronavirus taskforce” under Vice President Pence, and then continued in a slightly altered form through the Biden administration?

During the early 1970s, as the (tragically escalated) Viet Nam War foreign policy fiasco was starting to wind down, an academic psychologist focusing on group dynamics and decision making was struck by parallels between his own research findings and the group behaviors involved in the Bay of Pigs foreign policy fiasco documented in A thousand days;: John F. Kennedy in the White House by Arthur Schlesinger. Intrigued, he began to further investigate the decision making involved in this case study, as well as the policy debacles of the Korean War, Pearl Harbor, and the escalation of the Viet Nam War. He also examined and developed case studies involving what he saw as major United States Government policy triumphs. These included the management of the Cuban missile crisis, and development of the Marshall Plan. On the basis of these case studies, examined in light of current group dynamic psychology research, he developed what a seminal book which became a cautionary core text for most students of Political Science.

Victims of Groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes

Author Irving Janis, Publisher Houghton Mifflin Company July 1, 1972

Biographical Context

Irving Janis (1918-1990) was a 20th century social psychologist who identified the phenomenon of groupthink. Between 1943 and 1945, Janis served in the Research Branch of the Army, studying the morale of military personnel. In 1947 he joined the faculty of Yale University and remained in the Psychology Department there until his retirement four decades later. He was also an adjunct professor of psychology at the University of California, Berkeley.​

​

Janis focused much of his career on studying decision making, particularly in the area of challenging habitual acts such as smoking and dieting. He researched group dynamics, specializing in an area he termed “groupthink,” which describes how groups of people are able to reach a compromise or consensus through conformity, without thoroughly analyzing ideas or concepts. He revealed the relationship peer pressure has to conformity and how this dynamic limits the confines of the collective cognitive ability of the group, resulting in stagnant, unoriginal, and at times, damaging ideas.​

​

Throughout his career, Janis authored a number of articles and governmental reports and several books including Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes and Crucial Decisions: Leadership in Policy Making and Crisis Management.​

​

Irving Janis developed the concept of groupthink to explain the disordered decision-making process that occurs in groups whose members work together over an extended period of time. His research into groupthink led to the wide acceptance of the power of peer pressure. According to Janis, there are several key elements to groupthink, including:​

• The group develops an illusion of invulnerability that causes them to be excessively optimistic about the potential outcomes of their actions.
  • Group members believe in the inherent accuracy of the group's beliefs or the inherent goodness of the group itself. Such an example can be seen when people make decisions based on patriotism. The group tends to develop negative or stereotyped views of people not in the group.
  • The group exerts pressure on people who disagree with the group's decisions.
  • The group creates the illusion that everyone agrees with the group by censoring dissenting beliefs. Some members of the group take it upon themselves to become “mindguards” and correct dissenting beliefs.

This process can cause a group to make risky or immoral decisions.​

This book was one of my assigned textbooks during undergraduate studies in the early 1980s, and it has deeply influenced my entire career as a scientist, physician, academic, entrepreneur, and consultant. It has been widely read, often as required reading during undergraduate political science coursework, and A Review of General Psychology survey (published in 2002) ranked Janis as the 79th most cited psychologist of the 20th century.

As I have considered the revelations provided by the recent books from Dr. Scott Atlas (A Plague Upon Our House: My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America) and Dr. Deborah Birx (Silent Invasion: The Untold Story of the Trump Administration, Covid-19, and Preventing the Next Pandemic Before It's Too Late), I realized that the prescient insights of Dr. Janis were directly applicable to the group dynamics, behaviors and faulty decision making observed within the core HHS leadership “insider group” responsible for much of the grossly dysfunctional decision making which has characterized the COVIDcrisis.

Janis’ insights into the process of groupthink in the context of dysfunctional public policy decision making profoundly foreshadowed the behaviors observed within the HHS COVID leadership team.

A high degree of group cohesiveness is conductive to a high frequency of symptoms of groupthink, which in turn are conductive to a high frequency of defects in decision-making. Two conditions that may play an important role in determining whether or not group cohesiveness will lead to groupthink have been mentioned – insulation of the policy-making group and promotional leadership practices.​

Rather than paraphrasing his ideas, below I provide key quotes from his seminal work which help shed light on the parallels between the foreign policy decision making fiascos which he examined and current COVIDcrisis mismanagement.

I use the term “groupthink” as a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that peole engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the member’s strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. “Groupthink” is a term of the same order as the words in the newspeak vocabulary George Orwell presents in his dismaying 1984- a vocabulary with terms such as “doublethink” and “crimethink”. By putting groupthink with those Orwellian words, I realize that groupthink takes on an invidious connotation. The invidiousness is intentional. Groupthink refers to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment that results from in-group pressures.​

Hardhearted actions by softheaded groups

At first I was surprised by the extent to which the groups in the fiascoes I have examined adhered to group norms and pressures toward uniformity. Just as in groups of ordinary citizens, a dominant characteristic appears to be remaining loyal to the group by sticking with the decisions to which the group has committed itself, even when the policy is working badly and has unintended consequences that disturb the conscience of the members. In a sense, members consider loyalty to the group the highest form of morality. That loyalty requires each member to avoid raising controversial issues, questioning weak arguments, or calling a halt to softheaded thinking.​

​

Paradoxically, softheaded groups are likely to be extremely hardhearted toward out-groups and enemies. In dealing with a rival nation, policymakers comprising an amiable group find it relatively easy to authorize dehumanizing solutions such as large-scale bombings. An affable group of government officials is unlikely to pursue the difficult and controversial issues that arise when alternatives to a harsh military solution come up for discussion. Nor are members inclined to raise ethical issues that imply that this “fine group of ours, with its humanitarianism and its high-minded principles, might be capable of adopting a course of action that is inhumane and immoral.”​

The more amiability and esprit de corps among the members of a policy-making in-group, the greater is the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against out groups.​

Janis defined eight symptoms of groupthink:

1) An illusion of invulnerability, shared by most or all of the members, which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks.​

2) Collective efforts to rationalize in order to discount warnings which might lead the members to reconsider their assumptions before they recommit themselves to their past policy decisions.​

3) An unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.​

4) Stereotyped views of enemy leaders as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purposes.​

5) Direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group’s stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected of all loyal members.​

6) Self-censorship of deviations from the apparent group consensus, reflecting each member’s inclination to minimize to himself the importance of his doubts and counterarguments.​

7) A shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgements conforming to the majority view (partly resulting from self-censorship of deviations, augmented by the false assumption that silence means consent).​

8) The emergence of self-appointed mindguards- members who protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.​

[continued next post]

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

[continued from post above]

It is relatively easy to identify errors of thought, process, and decision making in retrospect. Much harder is to devise recommendations that will help to avoid repeating history. Fortunately, Dr. Janis’ provides a set of prescriptions which I have found useful throughout my career, and which can be readily and effectively applied in almost any group decision making environment. He provides the following context for his treatment plan:

My two main conclusions are that along with other sources of error in decision-making, groupthink is likely to occur within cohesive small groups of decision-makers and that the most corrosive effects of groupthink can be counteracted by eliminating group insulation, overly directive leadership practices, and other conditions that foster premature consensus. ​

Those who take these conclusions seriously will probably find that the little knowledge they have about groupthink increases their understanding of the causes of erroneous group decisions and sometimes even has some practical value in preventing fiascoes.​

Perhaps one step that might be taken to avoid further repeats of the public health policy “fiascoes” which characterize the domestic and global response to the COVIDcrisis is to mandate leadership training of the Senior Executive Service (much as mandated within DoD), and particularly within the leadership of the US Department of Health and Human Services.
Whether or not this ever becomes the governmental policy, below are the nine key points which any of us can apply when seeking to avoid groupthink in groups that we participate in.

It is relatively easy to identify errors of thought, process, and decision making in retrospect. Much harder is to devise recommendations that will help to avoid repeating history. Fortunately, Dr. Janis’ provides a set of prescriptions which I have found useful throughout my career, and which can be readily and effectively applied in almost any group decision making environment. He provides the following context for his treatment plan:

My two main conclusions are that along with other sources of error in decision-making, groupthink is likely to occur within cohesive small groups of decision-makers and that the most corrosive effects of groupthink can be counteracted by eliminating group insulation, overly directive leadership practices, and other conditions that foster premature consensus. Those who take these conclusions seriously will probably find that the little knowledge they have about groupthink increases their understanding of the causes of erroneous group decisions and sometimes even has some practical value in preventing fiascoes.​

Nine action items for avoiding groupthink

1) The leader of a policy-forming group should assign the role of critical evaluator to each member, encouraging the group to give high priority to airing objections an doubts. This practice needs to be reinforced by the leader’s acceptance of criticism of his own judgements in order to discourage the members from soft-pedaling their disagreements.​

2) The leaders in an organizations hierarchy, when assigning a policy planning mission to a group, should be impartial instead of stating preferences and expectations out the outset. This practice requires each leader to limit his briefings to unbiased statements about the scope of the problem and the limitations of available resources, without advocating specific proposals he would like to see adopted. This allows the conferees the opportunity to develop and atmosphere of open inquiry and to explore impartially a wide range of policy alternatives.​

3) The organization should routinely follow the administrative practice of setting up several independent policy-planning and evaluation groups to work on the same policy question, each carrying out its deliberations under a different leader.​

4) Throughout the period when the feasibility and effectiveness of policy alternatives are being surveyed, the policy-making group should from time to time divide into two or more subgroups to meet separately, under different chairmen, and then come together to hammer out their differences.​

5) Each member of the policy-making group should discuss periodically the group’s deliberations with trusted associates in his own unit of the organization and report back their reactions.​

6) One or more outside experts or qualified colleagues within the organization who are not core members of the policy-making group should be invited to each meeting on a staggered basis and should be encouraged to challenge the views of the core members.​

7) At every meeting devoted to evaluating policy alternatives, at least one member should be assigned the role of devil’s advocate.​

8) Whenever the policy issue involves relations with a rival nation or organization, a sizable bloc of time (perhaps an entire session) should be spent surveying all warning signals from the rivals and constructing alternative scenarios of the rivals’ intentions.​

9) After reaching a preliminary consensus about what seems to be the best policy alternative, the policy-making group should hold a “second chance” meeting at which every member is expected to express as vividly as he can all his residual doubts and to rethink the entire issue before making a definitive choice.​

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

BREAKING: U.S. life insurance companies have said that deaths have an unexplainable increase by 40% in 18-49 year olds

DEATHVAX™ gonna DEATHVAX™

2ndsmartestguyintheworld.substack.com

(fair use applies)


BREAKING: U.S. life insurance companies have said that deaths have an unexplainable increase by 40% in 18-49 year olds
DEATHVAX™ gonna DEATHVAX™
2nd Smartest Guy in the World
7 hr ago


Life insurance reporting continues to reinforce the “unexplainable” grim reality on the ground:

Anna Khait @Annakhait​

BREAKING: U.S. life insurance companies have said that deaths have an unexplainable increased by 40% in 18-49 year olds. For full video: youtu.be/-GXvV6Pybns​

August 6th 2022​

7,302 Retweets13,125 Likes​

And it’s not just SADS:

Anna Khait @Annakhait​

They saw 300% increase in cancer patients over the past year. From around 36,000 new cancer patients to over 120,000 in America.​

August 6th 2022​

415 Retweets1,205 Likes​

And it’s not just all of the life insurance companies corroborating this:

Anna Khait @Annakhait​

The data from the insurance companies has been confirmed by three military doctors who are now being hailed as whistleblowers.​

August 6th 2022​

226 Retweets1,085 Likes​

But don’t hold your breath that the Center for Disease Crimes will do anything but continue to run cover for their criminal handlers and owners:

Anna Khait @Annakhait​

The @CDCgov needs to look into why there is such an increase in deaths over the past year, since 2021. What has changed? The American people demand to know the truth!​

August 6th 2022​

212 Retweets1,102 Likes​

This substack has reported on this deadly trend previously:

2nd Smartest Guy in the World​

Yet Another Life Insurance CEO Reveals Deaths Are Up 40% Among Working People​

First it was CEO Scott Davison of OneAmerica who in January disclosed that deaths were up 40% among people ages 18-64: “We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business – not just at OneAmerica. The data is consistent across every player in that business…​

Read more​

a month ago · 96 likes · 7 comments · 2nd Smartest Guy in the World​

​

2nd Smartest Guy in the World​

BREAKING: Fifth largest life insurance company in the US paid out 163% more for deaths of working people ages 18-64 in 2021 - Total claims/benefits up $6 BILLION​

by Margaret Menge Five months after breaking the story of the CEO of One America insurance company saying deaths among working people ages 18-64 were up 40% in the third quarter of 2021, I can report that a much larger life insurance company, Lincoln National, reported a 163% increase in death benefits paid out under its group life insurance policies in …​

Read more​

2 months ago · 80 likes · 27 comments · 2nd Smartest Guy in the World​

Expect all-cause mortality to continue soaring as theVAIDS that every single DEATHVAXXED™ genetically modified human is currently experiencing in varying degrees will result in severe sickness from common cold and flu bugs. Of course, at which point the next “pandemic” in PSYOP-22 will be conveniently blamed alongside ever more “unexplainable”.

It’s a SADS, SADS, SADS world now, and it will only get SADSER when they go all in on the PSYOP-CLIMATE-CHANGE scam.
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

EFFECTIVE AT UNSAFE: With over 96% of the adult population fully vaccinated and 70+% boosted, Australia has just set a new record for COVID deaths.

DEATHVAX™ gonna DEATHVAX™: The Death Cultists only ever had two options: Bury heads deeper in sand Perform mental gymnastics. Do NOT comply.Become a paid subscriber: support the “Do NOT comply.” It’s 8 cents a day.

2ndsmartestguyintheworld.substack.com

(fair use applies)


EFFECTIVE AT UNSAFE: With over 96% of the adult population fully vaccinated and 70+% boosted, Australia has just set a new record for COVID deaths.
2nd Smartest Guy in the World
19 hr ago

DEATHVAX™ gonna DEATHVAX™:

CT @jehovahrappha​

With over 96% of the adult population fully vaccinated and 70+% boosted, Australia has just set a new record for COVID deaths. Source Truth | @KanekoaTheGreat​

​

August 5th 2022​

438 Retweets719 Likes​

The Death Cultists only ever had two options:

• Bury heads deeper in sand
• Perform mental gymnastics.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Would you want to know what could happen next in the COVID-19 pandemic?

Don't Look Up!

philipmcmillan.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Would you want to know what could happen next in the COVID-19 pandemic?
Don't Look Up!
Dr Philip McMillan
20 hr ago



This post was just recently censored on LinkedIn for not meeting community standards.

In making this post, I tried to be as cautious as possible to highlight this opinion of the next stage of the pandemic. Maybe too emotional or probably too sensational.

Let me know your thoughts.

WOULD OVER 100 MILLION EXCESS DEATHS IN THE NEXT YEAR SHOCK YOU?

Then, please do not read any further.

I hesitated to put this post on #linkedin because I could be wrong. However, what if this is right?

These predictions are based on the fact that my research indicates severe COVID-19 is a viral mediated autoimmune disease. Extrapolation of autoimmune complications leads me to these conclusions. These deaths are not just related to respiratory complications through COVID-19. In fact, this may be a small proportion. The expectation is mainly cardiometabolic, thromboembolic, neurologic and malignancy.

In early 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic hit Italy, I knew it would spread throughout Europe and the rest of the world. My research started immediately to try and understand how to mitigate mortality. Recall worrying about the use of ACE inhibitors (turned out not to be a problem - not every concern is correct) but the mortality was as expected when it hit the UK.

Currently, I am more anxious than March 2020.

The water is pulling back quickly from the beach and everyone is just looking and pointing at the interesting phenomenon. There is no realisation from the hundreds on the beach that it strongly indicates a tsunami will arrive in the next few minutes.

Do you shout a warning to everyone while running to higher ground?

There is no way to completely prevent mortality in this circumstance, but it can be mitigated if people move quickly.

In April 2022, as Omicron cases started to rise across the world, that represented the water starting to recede. It was a red flag moment in my opinion, as it should not happen, even with a new variant.

The tsunami wave is now on the horizon and even trying to move to higher ground now, may be too late.

I am willing to be the idiot that inappropriately shouted tsunami on the beach and nothing happened.

Could not live with myself if I remained silent because of fear.

Dear God, please let me be wrong!

 

[Zoner]

Would you want to know what could happen next in the COVID-19 pandemic?

Don't Look Up!

philipmcmillan.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Would you want to know what could happen next in the COVID-19 pandemic?
Don't Look Up!
Dr Philip McMillan
20 hr ago



This post was just recently censored on LinkedIn for not meeting community standards.

In making this post, I tried to be as cautious as possible to highlight this opinion of the next stage of the pandemic. Maybe too emotional or probably too sensational.

Let me know your thoughts.

WOULD OVER 100 MILLION EXCESS DEATHS IN THE NEXT YEAR SHOCK YOU?

Then, please do not read any further.

I hesitated to put this post on #linkedin because I could be wrong. However, what if this is right?

These predictions are based on the fact that my research indicates severe COVID-19 is a viral mediated autoimmune disease. Extrapolation of autoimmune complications leads me to these conclusions. These deaths are not just related to respiratory complications through COVID-19. In fact, this may be a small proportion. The expectation is mainly cardiometabolic, thromboembolic, neurologic and malignancy.

In early 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic hit Italy, I knew it would spread throughout Europe and the rest of the world. My research started immediately to try and understand how to mitigate mortality. Recall worrying about the use of ACE inhibitors (turned out not to be a problem - not every concern is correct) but the mortality was as expected when it hit the UK.

Currently, I am more anxious than March 2020.

The water is pulling back quickly from the beach and everyone is just looking and pointing at the interesting phenomenon. There is no realisation from the hundreds on the beach that it strongly indicates a tsunami will arrive in the next few minutes.

Do you shout a warning to everyone while running to higher ground?

There is no way to completely prevent mortality in this circumstance, but it can be mitigated if people move quickly.

In April 2022, as Omicron cases started to rise across the world, that represented the water starting to recede. It was a red flag moment in my opinion, as it should not happen, even with a new variant.

The tsunami wave is now on the horizon and even trying to move to higher ground now, may be too late.

I am willing to be the idiot that inappropriately shouted tsunami on the beach and nothing happened.

Could not live with myself if I remained silent because of fear.

Dear God, please let me be wrong!

Is there a link to this article?

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Is there a link to this article?

I'm not sure I understand your question. If you look at your question to me, you posted the link. ???? Do you mean the link to his linkedin article? He said in the substack that article was taken down so I assume no link, he reposed it in full in the substack (again, linked in my original post and in your question). If I'm misunderstanding your question please ask it again!

HD

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Biden leaves White House for 1st time since getting COVID-19

Ending his most recent COVID-19 isolation, President Joe Biden has left the White House for the first time since becoming infected last month.

apnews.com

(fair use applies)


Biden leaves White House for 1st time since getting COVID-19
By CHRIS MEGERIAN
yesterday

REHOBOTH BEACH, Del. (AP) — Ending his most recent COVID-19 isolation, President Joe Biden on Sunday left the White House for the first time since becoming infected with the coronavirus last month, settling in for a reunion with first lady Jill Biden in their home state of Delaware.

The president tested negative Saturday and Sunday, according to his doctor, clearing the way for him to emerge from an isolation that lasted longer than expected because of a rebound case of the virus. “He will safety return to public engagement and presidential travel,” Dr. Kevin O’Connor wrote.

“I’m feeling good,” Biden said before boarding Marine One outside the White House.

The Bidens were expected to spend the day in Rehoboth Beach, a popular vacation destination.

Biden originally tested positive on July 21, and he began taking the anti-viral medication Paxlovid, which is intended to decrease the likelihood of serious illness from the virus. According to his doctor, Biden’s vital signs remained normal throughout his infection, but he his symptoms included a runny nose, cough, sore throat and body aches.

After isolating for several days, Biden tested negative on July 26 and July 27, when he gave a speech in the Rose Garden, telling Americans they can “live without fear” of the virus if they get booster shots, test themselves for the virus if they become sick and seek out treatments.

But Biden caught a rare rebound case of COVID-19 on July 30, forcing him to isolate again. He occasionally gave speeches from a White House balcony, such as when he marked the killing of an al-Qaida leader or a strong jobs report.
He continued to test positive until Saturday, when he received his first negative result. While the president was isolating in the White House residence, the first lady remained in Delaware.

The Bidens are scheduled to visit Kentucky on Monday to view flood damage and meet with families.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Protocol for Vaccine-Injured Focuses on Spike Protein and Helping Patients Recover: Dr. Pierre Kory

www.theepochtimes.com

(fair use applies)

Protocol for Vaccine-Injured Focuses on Spike Protein and Helping Patients Recover: Dr. Pierre Kory
By Harry Lee and Jan Jekielek
August 7, 2022

People injured by COVID-19 vaccines have been largely ignored by hospitals, federal health agencies, and the mainstream media.

According to Dr. Pierre Kory, a first-ever protocol for vaccine-injured people focuses on countering the spike protein mechanisms and shows promising results.

Kory is a pulmonary and critical care specialist. He’s also the president of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC Alliance), a non-profit organization dedicated to developing protocols to prevent and treat COVID-19.

“What we’re trying to focus on is ‘spikeopathy,’ which is the study of the pathogenesis of the spike protein. And there’s no one teaching that to doctors in the system,” Kory told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders.”

“I’m humbled by these patients. Often they’re extremely complex, very sick. But I get them better to some extent, sometimes [to] large extents. I see robust responses. I see the diminution or mitigation of lots of symptoms, and others are much more difficult.”

On Aug. 3, the FLCCC Alliance updated its “I-RECOVER” post-vaccine protocol (pdf), which stresses the importance of early and individualized treatment.

Kory said there are about six or seven mechanisms under which the spike protein is causing illnesses. The protocol attempts to find therapeutics to counteract or control the mechanisms.

Studies and doctors have said that COVID-19 vaccines, especially those using mRNA technology, produce persisting spike protein in the human body and likely cause clots, heart inflammation, cancers, and other illnesses.

Kory said the protocol is still in development.

“Everything I’m doing is evolving. The way I was treating patients three months ago and the way I’m treating them now is very different,” he said.

“I’m learning new tricks like new compounds, new therapeutics that seemed to work well. I’m using anticoagulation a little bit more. And in select patients, I’m finding a lot of benefit from that.”

Kory said he has been working with doctors worldwide to help vaccine-injured patients. For example, he’s worked with some experts in the UK who can do live-blood analysis in dark-field microscopy.

“We’re able to see all sorts of platelet aggregations, like very stimulated immune and clotting cells,” said Kory. “We’re finding tremendous responses to anticoagulation.”

Ignored Vaccine Injury

“The science is ignoring this concept of a vaccine injury syndrome. I will tell you, it is real, and it is common,” Kory said.
“If you look at VAERS, there’s a catastrophic amount of injuries being reported.”

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) monitors the safety of vaccines. The latest VAERS data show 1,341,608 reports of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines, including 29,460 deaths and 243,466 serious injuries as of July 8, 2022.

Kory said injuries reported in VAERS are under-reported. “The true number is unknown. But I will tell you it’s unacceptably high, and it’s very common.”

Kory said he has patients who had been injured for over a year without help. Some doctors ended the patients’ visits when they claimed the COVID-19 vaccines caused their illness.

“It’s a very troubling disease that we need help [with]. We need help from the system. We need to organize research. We need more open recognition of the syndrome and more publications. We just don’t have enough data,” said Kory.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that a report to VAERS does not mean that a vaccine caused an adverse event.

‘Unproven’ Therapies

Kory said he and other doctors have been attacked for “using unproven therapies” to treat COVID-19 patients or those injured by vaccines.

“Of course, I’m using unproven therapies. Show me what’s proven?” he said.

“There’s no organized effort to try to identify, in a controlled fashion, what’s working,” said Kory. “We’re left trying to doctor the way old school doctors did, by observation, experience, knowledge of pathophysiology, and knowledge of pharmacology. We’re just doctoring.”

Kory said it’s very common for doctors to use off-label medicines to treat patients.

Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, also said prescribing medicines off-label is “how medicine has always worked.”

“This is how individualized medicine works—the doctor is treating the patient and not treating with policy,” Risch told The Epoch Times in July.

“Doctors have the experience knowing these things work, or they inform the patients that maybe there’s only a 30 percent chance that this will work. They say it’s worth a try if you want to take that risk. That is called informed consent,” said Risch.

Attacks

Kory said he has been attacked for spreading misinformation, and his medical license has been threatened.

Kory and some doctors have advocated for the early treatment of COVID-19 from the first days of the pandemic.

Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were among the most prominent medicines they recommended.

“I know the drug works, and I’ve been disseminating that knowledge. Unfortunately, the narrative is that it doesn’t work,” said Kory, referring to ivermectin, one of the safest medicines in history.

“The science around the efficacy of ivermectin has never been more inconvenient to the pharmaceutical and vaccination industry in history.”

Kory said some heavily published trials were used to dismiss the efficacy of those two drugs. The trials were designed to use “toxic amounts of hydroxychloroquine” to show it’s dangerous. As to ivermectin, a different tactic had been used.

“They shortened the duration as much as possible. They started as late as possible. And they gave the lowest doses they could get away with because they wanted to try to show the inefficacy of ivermectin,” said Kory.

Kory said he’s not worried about his license because everything he said was based on his expertise.

Another attack is trying to remove his status as a board-certified doctor, or an expert in a certain specialty. It requires extensive training and passing an exam to become board-certified. The American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) is the leader in the nation for physician specialty certification.

“Someone wrote to [ABMS], complaining about myself, Dr. Peter McCullough, and Dr. Paul Marik,” said Kory. “Dr. Peter McCullough is the most published expert in cardiorenal medicine. Paul Marik is the second most-published doctor in the history of our specialty, which is critical care medicine. And I was well known and highly published in another subfield of critical care medicine.”

It’s “absolutely shocking” that some of the most highly published, evidence-based medicine experts are being accused of misinformation, said Kory.

Shift

Kory said the truth would come out soon.

“The ability to suppress the scope and the scale of the vaccine injuries and deaths is starting to slip,” said Kory. “The ERs, the neurologists, cardiologists, oncologists, they’re seeing too many diseases in young people that they’ve never seen before—heart attacks, strokes, sudden deaths, and cancers. And you cannot suppress that. You cannot continue to suppress that.”

Kory said doctors in the system are now openly talking about the vaccines as a cause of injury.

Besides the massive number of adverse events reported in VAERS, 8,808 claims have been made to the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) as of July 1. It is currently the only program to compensate individuals harmed by adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines.

Only one claim has been determined eligible for compensation and is pending a review of expenses.

The CDC continues to say COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective and severe reactions after vaccination are rare.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration in June authorized emergency use of Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccines for children down to 6 months of age.

The mainstream media have largely ignored patients injured by the COVID-19 vaccines. Big Tech has also censored some stories of vaccine-injured people.

On Aug. 3, Kory, McCullough, and Dr. Robert Malone joined a panel on COVID-19 response at Hillsdale College in Washington, D.C. It was led by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), an outspoken critic of federal health agency failures and COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

During the panel, Johnson called the Biden administration, the federal health agencies, big pharma, corporate media, and Big Tech a “COVID cartel” that has sabotaged early treatment and censored dissent.

“It has been a colossal fraud, and is exemplified by massive corruption on almost every aspect of COVID,” said Kory.

Kory said that the past two-and-a-half years are a “shocking” example of regulatory capture of health agencies by the vaccination and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Recently disclosed information showed that Dr. Anthony Fauci and hundreds of scientists at the National Institutes of Health had received royalty payments from pharmaceutical companies. Fauci denied any wrongdoing during a Senate hearing in June.

“We cannot let industry profiteers guide public health policy,” said Kory.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

EXC: Wuhan Institute of Virology's 'Bat Woman' Is Still Hunting Bats For 'Recombinant' Research. » The National Pulse+

The Wuhan Institute of Virology, whose research into coronaviruses is believed by many to be the source of COVID-19, is engaging in similarly risky studies tracking bats and their ability to infect humans in caves across China. The unearthed paper follows the controversial lab using funds from...

thenationalpulse.com

(fair use applies)


EXC: Wuhan Institute of Virology’s ‘Bat Woman’ Is Still Hunting Bats For ‘Recombinant’ Research.
by Natalie Winters
August 7, 2022

The Wuhan Institute of Virology, whose research into coronaviruses is believed by many to be the source of COVID-19, is engaging in similarly risky studies tracking bats and their ability to infect humans in caves across China.

The unearthed paper follows the controversial lab using funds from Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes of Health (NIH) agency in collaboration with EcoHealth Alliance to gather bat samples. Beginning in 2014, led by EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak and the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s “Bat Woman” Shi Zhengli, researchers used the samples to conduct risky “gain-of-function” research, as now-deleted webpages reveal the lab manipulating bat coronaviruses to “replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV.”

The new study, published in May of 2020, appears to be engaging in similar research methods.

Researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, including “Bat Lady” Shi Zhengli, tracked and sampled the Cave Nectar Bat since it is “known to carry both filoviruses and coronaviruses,” according to the paper.

“In this study, we tracked 16 bats in Mengla County, Yunnan Province, China, using miniaturized GPS devices to investigate their movements and potential contact with humans. Furthermore, to determine the prevalence of coronavirus and filovirus infections, we screened for the nucleic acids of the Měnglà virus (MLAV) and two coronaviruses (GCCDC1-CoV and HKU9-CoV) in anal swab samples taken from bats and for antibodies against these viruses in human serum samples,” explains an overview of the researcher’s work.

The study also shows that researchers worked with “recombinant proteins,” a term that commonly appears in “gain-of-function” research.

https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/07/28/fauci-nih-agency-is-still-funding-ccp-military-labs/

Study.


The research was published in the journal Zoological Research and was funded by several Chinese Communist Party-run scientific organizations including the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC). The National Pulse has previously exposed the NSFC’s deep ties to China’s military.

The group’s 2020 funding guidelines identify “innovative research in defense and military and civilian integration” as receiving “preferential” funding. The foundation also inked a 2016 “strategic cooperative agreement” with the Science and Technology Committee of the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Military Commission – the regime’s paramount military policy-making body.

Annual reports from NSFC reveal several researchers from PLA-run institutions received millions in funding.

The paper also follows lies from EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak about the lab’s work with live bats, which were proved false through recovered footage from the lab. Deleted webpages and patents filed by the Wuhan Institute of Virology also show that researchers worked closely with bats despite the lab acknowledging that “the risk of being bitten by a bat still exists” even when protective gear is worn.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Long COVID symptoms affects one in eight, study suggests

One in eight people who get coronavirus develop at least one symptom of long COVID, one of the most comprehensive studies on the condition to date suggested on Thursday.

medicalxpress.com

(fair use applies)


Long COVID symptoms affects one in eight, study suggests
August 7, 2022

One in eight people who get coronavirus develop at least one symptom of long COVID, one of the most comprehensive studies on the condition to date suggested on Thursday.

With more than half a billion coronavirus cases recorded worldwide since the start of the pandemic, there has been rising concern about the lasting symptoms seen in people with long COVID.

However almost none of the existing research has compared long COVID sufferers with people who have never been infected, making it possible that some of the health problems were not caused by the virus.

A new study published in The Lancet journal asked more than 76,400 adults in the Netherlands to fill out an online questionnaire on 23 common long COVID symptoms.

Between March 2020 and August 2021, each participant filled out the questionnaire 24 times.

During that period, more than 4,200 of them—5.5 percent—reported catching COVID.

Of those with COVID, over 21 percent had at least one new or severely increased symptom three to five months after becoming infected.

However nearly nine percent of a control group which did not have COVID reported a similar increase.

This suggested that 12.7 percent of those who had COVID—around one in eight—suffered from long-term symptoms, the study said.

The research also recorded symptoms before and after COVID infection, allowing the researchers to further pinpoint exactly what was related to the virus.

It found that common long COVID symptoms include chest pain, breathing difficulties, muscle pain, loss of taste and smell, and general fatigue.

'Major advance'

One of the study's authors, Aranka Ballering of the Dutch University of Groningen, said long COVID was "an urgent problem with a mounting human toll".

"By looking at symptoms in an uninfected control group and in individuals both before and after SARS-CoV-2 infection, we were able to account for symptoms which may have been a result of non-infectious disease health aspects of the pandemic, such as stress caused by restrictions and uncertainty," she said.

The authors of the study said its limitations included that it did not cover later variants, such as Delta or Omicron, and did not collect information about some symptoms such as brain fog, which have since been considered a common sign of long COVID.

Another study author, Judith Rosmalen, said "future research should include mental health symptoms" such as depression and anxiety, as well as aspects like brain fog, insomnia and a feeling of malaise after even minor exertion.

Christopher Brightling and Rachael Evans, experts from Britain's Leicester University who were not involved in the study, said it was "a major advance" on previous long COVID research because it had an uninfected control group.

"Encouragingly, emerging data from other studies" suggests there is a lower rate of long COVID in people who have been vaccinated or infected with the Omicron variant, they said in a linked Lancet comment.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Over 80,000 tourists trapped in 'China's Hawaii' after COVID outbreak

Over 80,000 tourists are stranded in a resort city popularly known as "China's Hawaii" after a COVID flare-up led authorities to impose strict travel restrictions.

medicalxpress.com

(fair use applies)


Over 80,000 tourists trapped in 'China's Hawaii' after COVID outbreak
August 7, 2022

Over 80,000 tourists are stranded in a resort city popularly known as "China's Hawaii" after a COVID flare-up led authorities to impose strict travel restrictions.

Tourism hotspot Sanya is a city of more than a million people on the southern island of Hainan, where 483 COVID cases were reported Sunday.

All flights out of the city were cancelled over the weekend, with authorities also halting train ticket sales.

Tourists who want to leave must test negative in five PCR tests over seven days, health authorities said.

Hotels in the city have been asked to offer guests a 50 percent discount until the travel restrictions ease, an official said during a news briefing Saturday.

China is the only major economy still holding fast to a zero-COVID strategy with snap lockdowns and long quarantines, battering local tourism.

The country's borders have also remained largely closed since early 2020, halting international tourism.

The latest COVID outbreak comes during peak tourism season in Sanya, a popular surfing spot.

All entertainment venues including spas, karaoke bars and pubs have been closed since last week, but essential services such as supermarkets and pharmacies remain open.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Posting this here first because of what Geert predicted and how this seems to fit into those predictions. Posting this to MAIN as it's own thread too.

CDC Confirms First Human Infection with Flu Virus from Pigs During 2022 | CDC

August 5, 2022—CDC has reported the first human infection with an influenza (flu) virus that usually spreads in pigs occurring during 2022.

www.cdc.gov

(fair use applies)



CDC Confirms First Human Infection with Flu Virus from Pigs During 2022

August 5, 2022—CDC has reported the first human infection with an influenza (flu) virus that usually spreads in pigs occurring during 2022. The person had direct contact with pigs at an agricultural fair, where pigs tested positive for flu A. Recent reports of an increase in swine flu outbreaks in pigs in the U.S. suggest the risk of exposure and infection with these viruses may be higher than usual this fair season, which can last into the fall. CDC recommends people take precautions around swine, including in the fair setting.

Every year, there are rare sporadic human infections with flu viruses that usually spread in pigs. When found in people, these are called “variant flu virus” infections and designated with the letter “v” after the subtype. Variant flu virus infections are usually associated with contact with pigs, often at agricultural fairs. While these types of infections usually cause mild illness, they are concerning because they can cause severe illness, especially in people at higher risk of serious flu complications, and because of their potential to cause a flu pandemic.

The first variant flu virus infection of 2022 was reported by West Virginia and occurred in a person younger than 18 years who participated in an agricultural fair and had contact with pigs. An investigation is still ongoing but findings to date include:

• The infected person was not hospitalized and is recovering from their illness.
• The variant virus is a flu A H3N2v virus, based on RT-PCR testing done at CDC.
• Pigs at this fair tested positive for flu A.
• There have been reports of respiratory illness among other people who attended the same agricultural event. Specimens from other patients are being forwarded to CDC for additional testing.
• To date, no person-to-person spread of this virus has been confirmed.

Agricultural fairs take place across the United States every year, primarily during the summer months and into early fall. Many fairs have swine exhibitions, where pigs from different places come into close contact with each other and with people. These venues may increase the risk of spread of flu viruses among pigs and between pigs and people due to these interactions.

CDC Recommends Precautions while Attending Agricultural Fairs

People who are at higher risk for developing serious flu complications should avoid pigs and swine barns at fairs. If they cannot avoid exposure to pigs, they should wear a well-fitting mask that covers the nose and mouth to reduce their risk of exposure to flu viruses. They should also wash their hands with soap and running water before and after exposure to pigs or a swine barn. If soap and water are not available, they should use an alcohol-based hand rub.

For people who are not at higher risk of serious flu complications, prevention measures to limit the spread of flu viruses include:

• Not eating or drinking while in pig areas,
• Avoiding contact with pigs that appear to be sick, and
• Washing hands often with soap and running water before and after contact with pigs.

People should take additional protective measures if they must come in contact with pigs that are known or suspected to be sick. This includes minimizing contact time with pigs and wearing personal protective equipment like protective clothing, gloves, and well-fitted masks that cover the mouth and nose when contact is required.

Note that seasonal flu vaccines are not formulated to protect against variant flu viruses, but the same flu antiviral drugs used to treat seasonal flu can be used to treat variant flu virus infection in children and adults.

How Variant Flu Virus Infections Happen

Flu viruses can spread from pigs to people and from people to pigs. Infected pigs can cough or sneeze, and droplets with flu virus in them can spread through the air. If these droplets land in your nose or mouth, or are inhaled, you can be infected. These infections have most commonly been reported after close proximity to infected pigs, such as in pig barns and livestock exhibits housing pigs at fairs.

Swine Flu Viruses Change Constantly

Like flu viruses in humans and other animals, swine flu viruses change constantly. Pigs can be infected by avian flu and human flu viruses as well as swine flu viruses. When flu viruses from different species infect pigs, the viruses can reassort (i.e., swap genes) and new viruses can emerge that can infect and spread easily from person-to-person. This is thought to have happened in 2009 when a new H1N1 virus with genes of avian, swine and human origin emerged to cause a flu pandemic.

Background

In 2005, human infection with a novel flu A virus flu became nationally notifiable in the United States. Novel flu A viruses are different from current seasonal viruses circulating in people and include variant flu viruses and avian flu viruses. Since that time, a total of 501 variant flu virus infections (of different flu A virus subtypes) have been identified in the United States and reported to CDC ranging from a high of 321 variant flu virus infections during the 2011-2012 flu season to a low of one during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 seasons. The 321 infections reported during the 2011-2012 seasons included 315 H3N2v, four H1N2v, and two H1N1v viruses detected during the 2011-2012 flu season. More than 90% of those infections were associated with attendance at agricultural fairs.

In general, the risk to the public from these infections is considered low, but each case of human infection with a variant flu virus should be fully investigated to be sure that such viruses are not spreading in an efficient and ongoing way in people, and to limit further exposure of people to infected animals if infected animals are identified. CDC is monitoring this situation closely and will make adjustments to the public health risk assessment and recommendations as circumstances warrant. CDC reports these cases in FluView.

Additional Resources

• Take Action to Prevent the Spread of Flu Between Pigs and People
• Key Facts for People Exhibiting Pigs at Fairs

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

[TRAILER] 5 Doctors Dying In 2 Weeks Is "Like Finding A Unicorn"

Full Interview Dr. Urso: https://brightlightnews.com/interview-how-did-5-gta-docs-die-in-2-weeks-dr-richard-urso-interview/ Full Interview Dr. Hodkinson: https://brightlightnews.com/interview-there-co

rumble.com

[TRAILER] 5 Doctors Dying In 2 Weeks Is "Like Finding A Unicorn"
Bright Light News
2 min 20 sec
Published August 2, 2022

[TRAILER] Within 2 weeks of Greater Toronto Area (GTA) healthcare workers being offered a 4th shot, 5 young doctors had died. Is there a connection?

We're investigating.

Join us for this trailer clip of interviews with Drs. Richard Urso, MD, and Roger Hodkinson, Pathologist, as they comment on these unprecedented deaths.

And stay tuned for the full interviews...

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

THIRTEEN Canadian Doctors Have Died Suddenly, Says Dr. William Makis

" Sadly, I expect many more deaths to come " - Dr. William Makis MD

lionessofjudah.substack.com

(fair use applies)


THIRTEEN Canadian Doctors Have Died Suddenly, Says Dr. William Makis
" Sadly, I expect many more deaths to come " - Dr. William Makis MD
Lioness of Judah Ministry
Aug 6

Dr. William Makis MD has tracked THIRTEEN Canadian doctors that have suddenly died :

UPDATE on Canadian doctors "dying suddenly"

I've now tracked 13 Canadian doctors "sudden deaths" (thank you to everyone who contributed info). This is the most complete data set I've seen anywhere by far.

Three doctors died while exercising (two swimming, one running), two of them were very high level athletes. Three doctors died "in their sleep" unexpectedly.

Two doctors also had aggressive cancer that had arisen within the past year.

All of them were at least triple vaccinated due to illegal vaccine mandates.

Remember: these are YOUNG healthy individuals who are always first in line to get jabbed. Vast majority of doctors will get their 4th and 5th jabs this summer and fall.

Sadly, I expect many more deaths to come.


“ All by design... This is just a beginning of a perfect storm.”

Exposing The Darkness​

HORRIFIC: Four Ontario Doctors Have Died This Week. Suddenly and Unexpectedly...​

All by design. mRNA injected and boosted doctors, nurses, pilots, drivers, police, military, and public servants getting very sick with “Covid” or dying “suddenly and unexpectedly”... This is just a beginning of a perfect storm…​

15 days ago · 108 likes · 69 comments · Lioness of Judah Ministry​

​

.​

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Fourteen young Canadian docs die after getting the shot. This is not normal.

This is a list of just the docs my doctor friend in Canada heard about passively. In the past 30 years, he's never heard of a single death like this. Now there are at least 14.

stevekirsch.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Fourteen young Canadian docs die after getting the shot. Normally would be ~0 over 30 years.
This is a list of just the docs my doctor friend in Canada heard about passively. In the past 30 years, he's never heard of a single death like this. Not one. Now there are 14.
Steve Kirsch
Aug 7

Executive summary

A doctor friend in Canada heard about 14 deaths of Canadian doctors over the last 9 months. He’s been in practice for 30 years. He’s never heard of any such deaths before. Zero. Why is he now all of a sudden hearing of so many deaths, and these deaths are all happening very soon after vaccination.

The fact checkers assure us all that this is simply coincidence. The Canadian doctors continue to believe what they are told to believe. I predict the next shots will be even worse.

Sadly, I don’t think the Canadian doctors are ever going to figure this out.

Introduction

Canadian doctors keep lining up to get the shots to be protected from a disease which is easily treatable with a combination of drugs with little to no side effects.

A doctor friend in Canada has been passively noticing the untimely death of doctors in Canada shortly after they were forced to get the third and fourth doses of the vaccine. He sent me these images below which have been sent to him. He’s not proactively researching these. There are likely a lot more he doesn’t know about.

What’s astounding is that this is a vaccine, which according to this CDC study, makes it nearly impossible for you to die after the shot. Yet, these doctors all died shortly after the shot.

Apparently, none of the deaths were covered in the Canadian mainstream media, so I thought you should know about them.

There was coverage of six recent deaths in Health Impact News: 6 Canadian Medical Doctors Died Within 2 Weeks After 4th COVID Booster Shots for Employees Started at One Hospital.

Let me be very clear. You cannot have 6 Canadian docs die within 2 weeks after the vaccine if there isn’t something wrong with the shot. Period. Full stop. Each of these is a very rare event. Having them clustered like this is a sure sign the vaccines killed them. Any honest scientist would start with this hypothesis as the most obvious hypothesis and only reject it if there was compelling evidence to the contrary.

14 deaths of young doctors in the last 9 months, all shortly after the jab

As of August 6, 2022, my doctor friend only knows about these 14 deaths this year.

Guess how many similar deaths (young doctors dying unexpectedly) he’s noticed in the past 30 years in practice? Yup, zero.

In short, this vaccine is disaster and the proof is in public view.

Will they stop the shots? Of course not.

According to the fact checkers, none of these doctors died from the shots, they all died of other causes. Duh. The vaccine always kills people by stopping their heart, brain, etc. so it always looks like they died from something else because they did.

But when normally healthy people all of a sudden die like this in rapid succession, you are being totally disingenuous if you rule out the vaccine as the likely instigator of the death.

What the fact checkers fail to point out is that in many cases, the diseases often first started after the first vaccine shot, and then got worse with progressive shots. Somehow, they always miss that point that the vaccine accelerated the death. The fact that all these doctors died in close proximity to the shots is just too coincidental.

Canadian docs will keep believing the “safe and effective” narrative because that’s what they are trained to do: trust the authorities

My doctor friends in Canada simply cannot believe how brainwashed his colleagues are. Zero deaths in 30 years, now all of a sudden 14 deaths in 9 months each happening shortly after their shots. Come on. That’s not bad luck. No way.

The Canadian docs will continue to ignore the stats, believe the “fact checkers,” and line up for the shots. It will get worse on the next round.

14 Canadian doctors who have died after being given the vaccine





Vincent Mak

My friend knew him. Covered here and here.



It’s not just doctors being affected

Doctors, athletes, celebrities are all very visible.

But this “problem” is happening to pretty everyone who is aware of what is going on around them.

Read this post by Anita Jader. It’s just one example. Have you ever seen a post like this in your life? Do you think this is “normal”?

Summary

This is a partial list. There are more in the comments.

The key point is the sheer number of events are simply too high in the doctor category. These doctors all dying shortly after the jab suggests a most likely hypothesis be that the jab killed them, e.g., by accelerating their existing medical condition, or creating a new medical condition, or by a mysterious sudden death.

So while it could be that one or maybe two of the deaths were just coincidences, odds are that the rest were not.
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Young Canadian doctors dead/dying, Manitoba data and other Canadian government data

Nothing to see here folks. Move along.

jessicar.substack.com

(fair use applies)

Young Canadian doctors dead/dying, Manitoba data and other Canadian government data
Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
Jessica Rose
18 hr ago


UPDATE: Dr. Sohrab Lutchmedial, a cardiologist in New Brunswick, Canada, died in his sleep in November 2021, reportedly from a heart defect. He was 52.

AND ANOTHER… (these are 2 separate men: 1 was 52; 1 was 49).

UPDATE: Another Canadian man died suddenly.



First of all, young and healthy Canadian physicians are dying post COVID-19 injections. It’s a fact. They’re no longer with us. These deaths are statistically improbable and are not being investigated. What killed them? “Unspecified illness”? “Died swimming”? “Died in her sleep”? Are you f-ing kidding me? Have any of you heard of this happening before? I have not.

[edited out graphic of 14 doctors she brought over from Steve Kirsch's substack, see post above with that graphic]

That’s #1.

#2: Manitoba data. Please go to this place where you’ll find data released on COVID-19-injection-related hospitalizations, ICU visits and deaths, as of 1:00 am on June 22, 2022. There are 2 charts that I would like to call attention to. The first one is Figure 6 as shown below.


Figure 2: Figure 6. Age-Standardized Rate (/100,000 person days) and Risk of Severe Outcomes Associated with COVID-19 Manitoba, April 1, 2022 – April 30, 2022. RMD_COVID19_Weekly_Report.knit

This chart shows that the ‘Fully Vaccinated’ individuals are being hospitalized at higher rates per 100,000 person days. It also shows that more ‘Unvaccinated’ individuals are being sent to ICUs and dying. Rahh-hahahhhahaaa-eaaallllyyyyyyy?
Do you know what I have to say about that? Look at the paragraph written above Figure 6. It states that the definition of an ‘Unvaccinated’ person is, and I quote:

Unvaccinated Case: Individuals not vaccinated or vaccinated 0–13 days following the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.​

I have written about this before using Nova Scotia data and in a publication that you can find here.

LET’S SAY THIS IN WITH CAPS LOCK ON AGAIN: IT IS POSSIBLE THAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE ‘UNVACCINATED’ INDIVIDUALS IN THESE DATA WERE IN FACT DOSED ONCE, MEANING, THEY WERE INJECTED! This could very well be why we see ANY reports of hospitalizations, ICU visits or deaths in the ‘Unvaccinated’ group. The actual ‘uninjected’ group most likely have close to zero hospitalizations, ICU visits or deaths.

Once again, let’s redo this chart so that the data are represented properly. The chart of the left is the depiction of the data if 100% of the ‘Unvaccinated’ are re-classified properly as having received a Single Dose. However, the chart on the right is the most appropriate way to depict the data. 20% of the ‘Unvaccinated’ data was kept classified as such, and the other 80% were classified as having received a Single Dose. The 20/80% split seems reasonable to me. It’s likely not 0/100%.


Figure 3: The Manitoba data from Figure 6 whereby the ‘Unvaccinated’ are properly named Single Dose (left). The ‘Unvaccinated’ individuals reclassified properly into one of two categories: having received NO doses (red) or having received a single dose (orange) (right).

What does the more appropriately depicted bar graph on the right in Figure 3 tell us? It tells us that far fewer uninjected individuals are ending up in the hospital, ICU and dead and that following a single injection, many individuals are ending up in the hospital, ICUs and dead.

#3: Canadian health infobase data for serious and non-serious reports of adverse events in the context of the COVID-19 injectable products. The first graph I want to remark on is the one with the rates of the most frequently-reported adverse events. Paraesthesia? Really? Do you guys know what paraesthesia is indicative of?


Figure 4. Rate of the most frequently reported adverse events by vaccine type (Total) up to and including July 22, 2022 (n=125,852). COVID-19 vaccine safety: Report on side effects following immunization - Canada.ca

Paraesthesia is a technical term used to reflect a perception of abnormal sensation, including feelings of pins and needles, tingling, pricking or a feeling as if ants are crawling over/under the skin and patients should be encouraged to fully describe what they are feeling. Paresthesia suggests abnormality affecting the sensory nervous system and may arise anywhere from the peripheral nerve to the sensory cortex.1​

It is a neurological condition. Neurological. I find it shocking that the number 1 reported AE in this database is a neurological dysfunction associated with such conditions as multiple sclerosis and encephalitis.2 Shocking. But nothing to see.

The other graph I would like to bring attention is the one before the paraesthesia nightmare plot.


Figure 5: Figure 3, Rate of adverse event reports by age group up to and including July 22, 2022 (n=49,921). COVID-19 vaccine safety: Report on side effects following immunization - Canada.ca

I don’t know if you guys noticed this, but what this data shows is that 23/100,000 kids ages 5-11 reported an adverse event in the context of the COVID-19 injectable products. That’s 1/4348 kids. 12-17 year olds: even better - 1/2941. 18-29: even better still! 1/2000 18-29 year olds suffering and reporting an adverse event. Is it myocarditis? Neurological issues? Death? They’re all adverse events being reported and listed as potential side effects of these injections. It could be any one of these. *This does not account for under-reporting.


Figure 6: Same as Figure 5 (Figure 3) but vertical bars. COVID-19 vaccine safety: Report on side effects following immunization - Canada.ca

Seriously. Even with the lamentable data exposure and non-existent transparency, even with the incredible and insidious censorship, even with the global hypnosis, you have to admit: SOMETHING IS WRONG HERE.

Enjoy your day and tell at least one other person the truth today.


1 Paraesthesia and peripheral neuropathy
2 Numbness (paresthesia and neuropathy) (MPKB)
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

JoJo, a "vaccinated" silverback gorilla in Chicago's Brookfield Zoo, has now "died suddenly"—the second jabbed gorilla to die in captivity these last 3 months

The prior one, in a Texas zoo, died of "multiple organ failure"; and many other zoo animals also have died strangely since the "vaccination" drive began. So what about racehorses and police dogs?

markcrispinmiller.substack.com

(fair use applies)


JoJo, a "vaccinated" silverback gorilla in Chicago's Brookfield Zoo, has now "died suddenly"—the second jabbed gorilla to die in captivity these last 3 months
The prior one, in a Texas zoo, died of "multiple organ failure"; and many other zoo animals also have died strangely since the "vaccination" drive began. So what about racehorses and police dogs?
Mark Crispin Miller
13 hr ago


On September 7 last year, Chicago’s Brookfield Zoo started “vaccinating” animals":

To The Lifeboats @TTLBoats
Silverback gorilla all of a sudden had an acute illness they were trying to address when he had a heart attack.

​

​

​

August 4th 2022
23 Retweets61 Likes


And now this happened:

JoJo the silverback gorilla is dead following emergency medical procedure at Brookfield Zoo
August 1, 2022

The silverback western lowland gorilla went into cardiac arrest during an emergency veterinary procedure prompted by an acute illness, according to the Chicago Zoological Society, which runs the suburban zoo.

JoJo was 42.

JoJo the silverback gorilla is dead following emergency medical procedure at Brookfield Zoo

JoJo, 42, sired five offspring to help survival of the endangered western lowland gorilla species.

chicago.suntimes.com

Sound familiar? This happened on May 5, at the Gladys Porter Zoo in Brownsville, Texas:

Igor’s Newsletter
Fully Vaccinated Gorilla Dies of Multiple Organ Failure
Apparently, a previously healthy gorilla died suddenly and unexpectedly of “multiple organ failure”. This was a very happy and healthy gorilla, who recently gave birth. Watch her recent video and you can see how happy was she and her offspring. A very touching video and very cute also…
Read more
3 months ago · 511 likes · 369 comments · Igor Chudov


JoJo’s “sudden death” inspired us to start looking for reports of other zoo animals “dying suddenly” since January, 2021; and, so far, we’ve found these:

31-year-old chimp Kirk dies at Dallas Zoo due to surprise heart disease
August 27, 2021

This article also notes this prior sudden death at Dallas Zoo (along with many others prior to the “vaccine” rollouts):

• Keeya, a 6-year-old Hartmann's mountain zebra, died in March 2021 due to a mysterious unexplained head injury.

31-year-old chimp Kirk dies at Dallas Zoo due to surprise heart disease

Utica Zoo’s adored red panda dies unexpectedly
Oct 24, 2021

Utica Zoo's adored red panda dies unexpectedly

3 Snow Leopards Die from COVID Complications at Nebraska Zoo: 'Truly Heartbreaking'
November 13, 2021

3 Snow Leopards Die from COVID Complications at Nebraska Zoo: 'Truly Heartbreaking'

Three snow leopards have died from COVID-19 complications at the Lincoln Children's Zoo in Nebraska after testing positive for the virus in October, according to zoo officials

people.com

And, from Liverpool, news of a female jaguar “dying suddenly”:

Heartbreak as animal dies overnight at Chester Zoo
March 1, 2022

An investigation is underway into the sudden death

Much loved jaguar dies suddenly at Chester Zoo

<span id="docs-internal-guid-4a70fad9-7fff-a75e-6bf7-5d47cdf73ef2">An investigation is underway into the sudden death</span>

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

And then there’s this strange story, of 12 stingrays all “dying suddenly” at ZooTampa. Though it strikes me as unlikely that a zoo would “vaccinate” a bunch of fish, it wouldn’t be the craziest thing that’s happened under COVID.

Entire enclosure of animals dies overnight in puzzling incident at Florida zoo
June 4, 2021

Entire enclosure of animals dies overnight in puzzling incident at Florida zoo

Zoo says it will bring in outside experts to investigate cause of sudden deaths of 12 stingrays

www.independent.co.uk

This discovery has prompted us to reconsider several stories of racehorses and police dogs “dying suddenly”—stories we ignored, thinking they were unrelated to the “vaccination” drive. (Pumped full of drugs, like the suffering livestock in factory farms, racehorses have died suddenly before these last two years.)

But now it seems unlikely that such deaths are not in any way related to the “vaccination” drive; and so I turn to you all, faithful readers, to see if any of you know of racetracks, or racehorse owners, and.or police departments “vaccinating” their animals.

Thank you for your help.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Pfizer Documents & Official Real-World Data prove the COVID Vaccines are already causing Mass Depopulation

by THE EXPOSÉ Covid-19 vaccination is causing mass depopulation. This is an extremely bold claim to make. But unfortunately, this bold claim is backed up by a mountain of evidence contained in the confidential Pfizer documents and official Government data from around the world.

2ndsmartestguyintheworld.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Pfizer Documents & Official Real-World Data prove the COVID Vaccines are already causing Mass Depopulation
2nd Smartest Guy in the World
13 hr ago

by THE EXPOSÉ

Covid-19 vaccination is causing mass depopulation.

This is an extremely bold claim to make.

But unfortunately, this bold claim is backed up by a mountain of evidence contained in the confidential Pfizer documents and official Government data from around the world.

The world is at a crossroads, and the elite has two choices. They sustain millions or even billions of people with financial support and help to ensure they survive and live quality lives. Or, they set about to depopulate the world.

Unfortunately, evidence suggests they chose the depopulation route a while ago, and their plan to do so is already in motion.

Here is that sinister and alarming evidence.

Excess Deaths

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) publishes weekly figures on deaths registered in England and Wales. The most recent data shows deaths up to 22nd July 2022.

The following chart, created by the ONS, shows the number of deaths per week compared to the five-year average –


Source

As you can see from the above, from around May 2021 onwards, England and Wales recorded a huge amount of excess deaths that were not attributed to Covid-19 compared to the five-year average. It then appears that excess deaths dropped at the start of 2022.

But appearances can be deceiving, and the only reason they dropped is that the ONS decided to include the 2021 data in the 5-year-average. This makes it all the more concerning that excess deaths have been recorded every week since the end of April 2022 compared to the five-year average (2016 to 2019 + 2021).

The most recent week shows that there were 10,978 deaths in England and Wales, equating to 1,680 excess deaths against the five-year average. Only 745 of those deaths were attributed to Covid-19.


Source

We also see a similar pattern occurring in Scotland.

The following chart is taken from Public Health Scotland’s ‘Covid-19 wider impacts dashboard’ found here, and it shows the percentage change in deaths compared with the 2015-2019 five-year average for the corresponding time –


Source

Scotland has recorded excess deaths among all age groups since the beginning of 2021. But what’s notable here is the same pattern we’ve seen in England and Wales. In January 2021, a lot of deaths were attributed to Covid-19. But then by around May 2021 excess deaths began to pick up again, however, this time they could not all be attributed to Covid-19.

There has then been a slight fall at the beginning of 2022 before they again picked up around May 2022, just like in England and Wales.

The question is why.

One could argue that perhaps the population of the United Kingdom is extremely unhealthy compared to the rest of the world and therefore more people are dying. But this unfortunately isn’t a situation that is just isolated to the UK.

Most of Europe is still recording a significant amount of excess deaths, as can be seen in the following official chart compiled by Eurostat showing excess mortality across Europe in May 2022 –


Source

As you can see, the world is experiencing an extremely serious issue where tens to hundreds of thousands more people are dying than what is expected every single week, and further evidence suggests it’s because of the Covid-19 injections.

Mortality Rates per 100,000 are lowest among the Unvaccinated in all Age Groups

According to a report published on 6th July 2022, by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, just hours before Boris Johnson announced he was resigning as Prime Minister of the UK, the mortality rates per 100,000 are the lowest among the unvaccinated population in all age groups.

The report is titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here.

Table 2 of the report contains the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status by age group for deaths per 100,000 person-years in England up to May 2022.

Here’s how the ONS present the data for 18 to 39-year-olds in May 2022 –


Source

We took the figures and produced charts for every single age group in a recently published article that can be read here. But here are a few examples to prove the severity of the problem.

The following chart shows the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status among 18 to 39-year-olds for Non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 –



In every single month since the beginning of 2022, partly vaccinated and double vaccinated 18-39-year-olds have been more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds. Triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds however have had a mortality rate that has worsened by the month following the mass Booster campaign that occurred in the UK in December 2021.

In January, triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were ever so slightly less likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds, with a mortality rate of 29.8 per 100,000 among the unvaccinated and 28.1 per 100,000 among the triple vaccinated.

But this all changed from February onwards. In February, triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were 27% more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds, with a mortality rate of 26.7 per 100k among the triple vaccinated and 21 per 100k among the unvaccinated.

Things have unfortunately got even worse for the triple vaccinated by May 2022 though. The data shows that triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were 52% more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds in May, with a mortality rate of 21.4 per 100k among the triple vaccinated and 14.1 among the unvaccinated.

The worst figures so far though are among the partly vaccinated, with May seeing partly vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 202% more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds.

The following chart shows the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status among 60 to 69-year-olds for Non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 –



The 60 to 69-year-olds show exactly the same pattern as 18 to 39-year-olds. The double and partly vaccinated have been more likely to die than the unvaccinated since the turn of the year, and the triple vaccinated have been more likely to die than the unvaccinated since February.

In January, partly vaccinated 60-69-year-olds were a shocking 256% more likely to die than unvaccinated 60-69-year-olds. Whilst in the same month, double vaccinated 60-69-year-olds were 223% more likely to die than unvaccinated 60-69-year-olds.

By May, triple vaccinated 60-69-year-olds were a troubling 117% more likely to die than unvaccinated 60-69-year-olds, with a mortality rate of 1801.3 per 100k among the triple vaccinated and a mortality rate of just 831.1 among the unvaccinated.

The following chart shows the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status among 80 to 89-year-olds for Non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 –



the unvaccinated the least likely to die every month since the turn of the year.

In April, double vaccinated 80-89-year-olds were 213% more likely to die than unvaccinated 80-89-year-olds, with a mortality rate of 7598.9 per 100k among the unvaccinated and a mortality rate of a troubling 23,781.8 per 100k among the double vaccinated.

But in the same month, partly vaccinated 80-89-year-olds were a terrifying 672% more likely to die than unvaccinated 80-89-year-olds, with a shocking mortality rate of 58,668.9 per 100k among the partly vaccinated.

By May 2022, triple vaccinated 80-89-year-olds were 142% more likely to die than unvaccinated 80-89-year-olds, with a mortality rate of 14,002.3 among the triple vaccinated and a mortality rate of 5,789.1 among the unvaccinated.

The following chart shows the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status for non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 for all age groups –


Click to enlarge

The official figures quietly published by the UK Government provide indisputable evidence that the Covid-19 vaccines are deadly and are killing people in the thousands.

How else do you explain significant excess deaths and the fact that the vaccinated are significantly more likely to die than the unvaccinated in every single age group?

Depopulation occurs when the number of people losing their lives outweighs the number of babies being born. So one saving grace for the fact hundreds of thousands more people are dying every single week than expected would be a massive uplift in new births.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the case, and the confidential Pfizer documents explain exactly why.

Newborn Baby Deaths hit critical levels for 2nd time in 7 Months in March 2022

Evidence contained in confidential Pfizer documents, which we will come to shortly, indicates that Covid-19 vaccination increases the risk of newborn babies sadly losing their lives. Unfortunately, we are now seeing evidence of this in real-world data and it can be found in the Public Health Scotland ‘Covid-19 Wider Impacts’ dashboard.


Click to enlarge Source

Official figures reveal that the rate of neonatal deaths increased to 4.6 per 1000 live births in March 2022, a 119% increase on the expected rate of deaths. This means the neonatal mortality rate breached an upper warning threshold known as the ‘control limit’ for the second time in at least four years.

The last time it breached was in September 2021, when neonatal deaths per 1000 live births climbed to 5.1. Although the rate fluctuates month to month, the figure for both September 2021 and March 2022 is on a par with levels that were last typically seen in the late 1980s.

Public Health Scotland (PHS) did not formally announce they had launched an investigation, but this is what they are supposed to do when the upper warning threshold is reached, and they did so back in 2021.

At the time, PHS said the fact that the upper control limit has been exceeded “indicates there is a higher likelihood that there are factors beyond random variation that may have contributed to the number of deaths that occurred”.

Birth Rates in Germany have dropped dramatically

The official German birth data was recently released and updated to April 2022 and it continues to show an 11% drop from the average for the last 7 years and a 13% drop from 2021.


Source


Source

This is all occurring because of the Covid-19 injections and the confidential Pfizer documents prove it.

[continued in next post]

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

[continued from post above]

Confidential Pfizer Documents reveal 90% of Covid Vaccinated Pregnant Women lost their Baby

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) attempted to delay the release of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine safety data for 75 years despite approving the injection after only 108 days of safety review on December 11th, 2020.

But in early January 2022, Federal Judge Mark Pittman ordered them to release 55,000 pages per month. They released 12,000 pages by the end of January.

Since then, PHMPT has posted all of the documents on its website. The latest drop happened on 1st August 2022.

One of the documents contained in the data dump is ‘reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf’. Page 12 of the confidential document contains data on the use of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection in pregnancy and lactation.

Pfizer state in the document that by 28th February 2021 there were 270 known cases of exposure to the mRNA injection during pregnancy.

Forty-six percent of the mothers (124) exposed to the Pfizer Covid-19 injection suffered an adverse reaction.

Of those 124 mothers suffering an adverse reaction, 49 were considered non-serious adverse reactions, whereas 75 were considered serious. This means 58% of the mothers who reported suffering adverse reactions suffered a serious adverse event ranging from uterine contraction to foetal death.


Source – Page 12

A total of 4 serious foetus/baby cases were reported due to exposure to the Pfizer injection.



But here’s where things get rather concerning. Pfizer state that of the 270 pregnancies they have absolutely no idea what happened in 238 of them.

But here are the known outcomes of the remaining pregnancies –



There were 34 outcomes altogether at the time of the report, but 5 of them were still pending. Pfizer note that only 1 of the 29 known outcomes were normal, whilst 28 of the 29 outcomes resulted in the loss/death of the baby. This equates to 97% of all known outcomes of Covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy resulting in the loss of the child.

When we include the 5 cases where the outcome was still pending it equates to 82% of all outcomes of Covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy resulting in the loss of the child. This equates to an average of around 90% between the 82% and 97% figure.

Unfortunately, we are seeing the above play out in the real world and can conclude so thanks to data provided by the U.S Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

Covid-19 Vaccination increases risk of suffering Miscarriage by at least 1,517%

According to the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC)) Vaccine Adverse Event Database (VAERS), as of April 2022, a total of 4,113 foetal deaths had been reported as adverse reactions to the Covid-19 injections, 3,209 of which were reported against the Pfizer injection.



The CDC has admitted that just 1 to 10% of adverse reactions are actually reported to VAERS therefore the true figure could be many times worse. But to put these numbers into perspective, there were only 2,239 reported foetal deaths to VAERS in the 30 years prior to the emergency use authorisation of the Covid-19 injections in December of 2020.
(Source)

And a further study which can be viewed here, found that the risk of suffering a miscarriage following Covid-19 vaccination is 1,517% higher than the risk of suffering a miscarriage following flu vaccination.



The true risk could however actually be much higher because pregnant women are a target group for Flu vaccination, whereas they are only a small demographic in terms of Covid-19 vaccination so far.

Would it shock you to find out that both Pfizer and Medicine Regulators around the world were all fully aware this would happen and instead chose to cover it up?

Pfizer and Medicine Regulators hid dangers of Covid-19 Vaccination during Pregnancy due to Animal Study finding an increased risk of Birth Defects & Infertility

Medicine Regulators claim that ‘Animal studies do not indicate direct or indirect harmful effects with respect to pregnancy etc.’. But this is an outright lie.

The actual study can be viewed in full here and is titled ‘Lack of effects on female fertility and prenatal and postnatal offspring development in rats with BNT162b2, a mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine‘.

Unfortunately, the study found that Covid-19 vaccination significantly increases the risk of birth defects and infertility.
The study was performed on 42 female Wistar Han rats. Twenty-one were given the Pfizer Covid-19 injection, and 21 were not.

Here are the results of the study –


Source

The results of the number of foetuses observed to have supernumerary lumbar ribs in the control group were 3/3 (2.1). But the results of the number of foetuses to have supernumerary lumbar ribs in the vaccinated group were 6/12 (8.3). Therefore on average, the rate of occurrence was 295% higher in the vaccinated group.

Supernumerary ribs also called accessory ribs are an uncommon variant of extra ribs arising most commonly from the cervical or lumbar vertebrae.

So what this study found is evidence of abnormal foetal formation and birth defects caused by the Pfizer Covid-19 injection. But the abnormal findings of the study don’t end there. The ‘pre-implantation loss’ rate in the vaccinated group of rats was double that of the control group.


Source

Pre-implantation loss refers to fertilised ova that fail to implant. Therefore, this study suggests that the Pfizer Covid-19 injection reduces the chances of a woman being able to get pregnant. So, therefore, increases the risk of infertility.

So with this being the case, how on earth have medicine regulators around the world managed to state in their official guidance that “Animal studies do not indicate direct or indirect harmful effects with respect to pregnancy”? And how have they managed to state “It is unknown whether the Pfizer vaccine has an impact on fertility“?

The truth of the matter is that they actively chose to cover it up. We know this thanks to a ‘Freedom of Information (FOI) request made to the Australian Government Department of Health Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).
You can read the response to that Freedom of Information request here.

You’re probably wondering what process involved in Covid-19 vaccination could possibly lead to infertility, birth defects, pregnancy loss, and stillbirths. Well, you’ll also find the answer to that question in the confidential Pfizer documents that both the FDA and Pfizer attempted to delay releasing by 75 years.

Confidential Pfizer Documents reveal the Covid-19 Vaccine accumulates in the Ovaries

Another study, which can be found in the long list of confidential Pfizer documents that the FDA have been forced to publish via a court order here, was carried out on Wistar Han rats, 21 of which were female and 21 of which were male.

Each rat received a single intramuscular dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection and then the content and concentration of total radioactivity in blood, plasma and tissues were determined at pre-defined points following administration.

In other words, the scientists conducting the study measured how much of the Covid-19 injection has spread to other parts of the body such as the skin, liver, spleen, heart etc.

But one of the most concerning findings from the study is the fact that the Pfizer injection accumulates in the ovaries over time.

An ‘ovary’ is one of a pair of female glands in which the eggs form and the female hormones oestrogen and progesterone are made.


Source

In the first 15 minutes following injection of the Pfizer jab, researchers found that the total lipid concentration in the ovaries measured 0.104ml. This then increased to 1.34ml after 1 hour, 2.34ml after 4 hours, and then 12.3ml after 48 hours.

The scientists, however, did not conduct any further research on the accumulation after a period of 48 hours, so we simply don’t know whether that concerning accumulation continued.

But official UK data published by Public Health Scotland, which can be found here, offers some concerning clues as to the consequences of that accumulation on the ovaries.

Cases of Ovarian Cancer are at an all-time high

Official figures for the number of individuals suffering from ovarian cancer show that the known trend in 2021 was significantly higher than 2020 and the 2017-2019 average.


Ovarian Cancer – Source

The above chart shows up to June 2021, but the charts found on Public Health Scotland’s dashboard now show figures all the way up to February 2022 and unfortunately reveal that the gap has widened even further with the number of women suffering ovarian cancer increasing significantly.


Click to enlarge

With –

• The whole world suffering hundreds of thousands of excess deaths on a weekly basis,
• Official Government data showing mortality rates per 100,000 are the lowest among the unvaccinated population in all age groups,
• Official Public Health Scotland data showing new born baby deaths have hit critical levels for the 2nd time in seven months,
• Official Government of Germany data showing birth rates have dropped dramatically in 2021,
• Confidential Pfizer documents showing a miscarriage rate between 82% and 97%,
• CDC VAERS data showing Covid-19 vaccination increases the risk of suffering a miscarriage by at least 1,517%,
• The only animal study performed to prove the safety of administering the Pfizer vaccine during pregnancy indicating an increased risk of infertility and birth defects,
• Further confidential Pfizer documents revealing the vaccine accumulates in the ovaries,
• and further data from Public Health Scotland revealing cases of ovarian cancer are at an all-time high,

It looks like we have more than enough evidence to back up the bold claim that Covid-19 vaccination is causing mass depopulation.
.

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

ALL HYPOTHESES, INCLUDING THOSE POSTED THROUGH TWITTER, NOW ARCHIVED AT WMCRESEARCH.ORG

Website completely reformatted and updated

wmcresearch.substack.com

(fair use applies)


ALL HYPOTHESES, INCLUDING THOSE POSTED THROUGH TWITTER, NOW ARCHIVED AT WMCRESEARCH.ORG
Website completely reformatted and updated
Walter M Chesnut
6 hr ago

I have had an amazing number of requests for my work that was posted through Twitter and is now (because I was banned for calling the Spike Protein amyloidogenic) no longer available on the “platform.”

To that end, I have thoroughly updated and reformatted my research website so all can find my complete current and previous hypotheses, including those from Twitter, on the site.

WMC Research – Research and Views on COVID-19

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

Are ongoing investigations into the origin of SARS-COV2 still important?

This is a puzzling question when looked at objectively. Over 30 months into the pandemic that has killed over 6.5 million people, destroyed personal livelihoods for many in the business sector and consigned millions to disability through long Covid.

philipmcmillan.substack.com

(fair use applies)


Are ongoing investigations into the origin of SARS-COV2 still important?
Dr Philip McMillan
20 hr ago

This is a puzzling question when looked at objectively. Over 30 months into the pandemic that has killed over 6.5 million people, destroyed personal livelihoods for many in the business sector and consigned millions to disability through long Covid.

Additionally, the financial cost of lockdowns across the world still has to be paid.

Yet there are no protests to insist on answers to a most obvious question.

When the news of “gain of function” research on coronaviruses started to come through in October 2021, I did this recording to highlight what it could mean.

Watch video done in October 2021

There have been a number of papers recently supporting the argument that the pandemic originated from the Huanan Market in Wuhan, China.

While there is insufficient evidence to define upstream events, and exact circumstances remain obscure, our analyses indicate that the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 occurred via the live wildlife trade in China, and show that the Huanan market was the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.​

Worobey, Michael, et al. "The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan was the early epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic." Science (2022): abp8715.

Click on the link above to read the paper.

Strong evidence that the Huanan Market was an epicentre is clear. However, was this the first identification of the virus in China?

Here are some of the outstanding questions:

• If SARS-COV2 was transmitted initially from an animal vector, why is there no clear evidence for the host as yet?
• Circulating virus has been identified in specific parts of the world prior to the Huanan market epicenter event.
• The furin cleavage site on the spike protein has not been found in any other coronavirus.
• There is a patented sequence within the RNA of the SARS-COV2 virus.

Have you read the USA Senate Minority report on COVID-19 origins?

Counter to that argument is the USA Senate Minority report looking into the origins of COVID-19. Please read to have a broader view of the situation.

Origins Of Covid 19 Report​

13.2MB ∙ PDF File​

Read now​

This document highlights a few important points.​

The 7th International Military Sports Council Military World Games opened in Wuhan on October 18, 2019. A number of international athletes became sick during this time. Here is a quote from an athlete:

This was a city of 15 million people that was in lockdown. It was strange, but we were told this was to make it easy for the Games’ participants to get around. [I got] very sick 12 days after we arrived, with fever, chills, vomiting, insomnia.… On our flight to come home, 60 Canadian athletes on the flight were put in isolation [at the back of the plane] for the 12-hour flight. We were sick with symptoms ranging from coughs to diarrhea and in between.​

There was also evidence for experimentation with coronaviruses in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV):

​

WIV researchers confirmed to the WHO investigative team that they were conducting experimentations testing chimeric coronaviruses in 2018 and 2019. According to an interview with Shi published by Science, all coronavirus experimentation, including infecting hACE2 mice and civets, was done at the BSL-2 and BSL-3 levels – “the coronavirus research in our laboratory is conducted in BSL-2 or BSL-3 laboratories.”​

Why would the West miss a perfect opportunity to criticize China?

Tweet by Zhao actually suggests the pandemic did start in September, as is suggested in this addendum, but that it began in the United States.



Should the world turn a blind eye to this?

That question still stands today.

Work from India which helped to reopen the discussion about Gain of Function research.

How an Indian scientist couple worked to trace origin, course of COVID-19.

The Week Magazine India