New Revelations About Anthony Fauci as the Architect of the COVID Pandemic Ignored by Corporate News Organizations

The narrative is crumbling. We can now see who has been pulling the levers behind the curtain, and why. From The Free Press.

Fauci, who was the face of the public health community during the crisis, pushed the idea that the evidence strongly indicated that the virus was just a tragic, natural occurrence. He insisted, repeatedly, that an epidemic that started in Wuhan was unlikely to have been the result of an escape from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

But Fauci had an incentive to arrive at his conclusion about the deadly pandemic that started in Wuhan. The WIV was known for doing high-risk virology research studying and manipulating coronaviruses. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for almost 40 years, had funded such research at the WIV.

Fauci’s posture—dismissive toward the theory of the lab leak, and later, condescending toward those who entertained it—set what became the accepted narrative about the origins of the pandemic. It was a narrative that was parroted by the government, public health officials, and the media, and even enforced by social media platforms at the request of the Biden White House.

But last month, a trove of explosive emails and other documents were released by the U.S. House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. These revealed evidence of Fauci’s and other officials’ behind-the-scenes involvement with scientists and journalists, demonstrating their efforts to quash the lab leak theory.

You would think that these new revelations would lead our leading "news" organizations to scream for Fauci's head. You would think they would engage in concerted intense efforts to substantiate these red-hot leads. Predictably, if you search the archives for NYT, WaPo, CNN, NPR and MSNBC, you will see that all five of these "journalism" organizations have completely ignored these revelations that Anthony Fauci A) repeatedly lied to the American public by funding dangerous gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, B) lied about this after the pandemic resulted from his reckless research, and C) lied to the public by coordinating the writing & publication of the intentional false "Proximal Origin" paper to cover his tracks. Need I add that I have no respect for any of these "news" organizations, not only for their extremely-partisan lack of interest in this story, but also their non-curious angles on dozens of other stories over the past few years.

Continue ReadingNew Revelations About Anthony Fauci as the Architect of the COVID Pandemic Ignored by Corporate News Organizations

How to Evaluate the COVID Vaccine Program

How do you judge a vaccine program? Dr. Vinay Prasad: Excess Mortality is not the only measure that matters. All of these things matter:

1. Results in receipt of the vaccine among people who benefit.

2. Minimizes receipt of the vaccine among those who do not benefit (in absence of herd immunity considerations)

3. Voluntary choice is better than coercion

4. Informed consent is better than uninformed persuasion (values freedom)

5. If herd immunity is at play— i.e. if the vax halts transmission— researchers demonstrate the threshold necessary and prioritizes #3

6. Researchers do not delay FDA EUA of the vaccine merely to sabotage an ongoing election 7. Regulators monitors safety concerns carefully, and rapidly respond to changes.

Prasad concludes:

These 7 metrics are more comprehensive than excess mortality, and should be the basis to judge vaccine programs. By these metrics, because of the the heavy handed use of mandates and the negligent FDA regulation, the USA does not do well.

 

Continue ReadingHow to Evaluate the COVID Vaccine Program

Disturbing Revelations about the Pericarditis/Myocarditis Pathway Subsequent to Receiving mRNA COVID Vaccines

I was vaccinated twice and boosted once. I now regret receiving all of those shots, and it goes well beyond and rampant scientific and public health fraud being revealed, including the outrageous paper orchestrated by Anthony Fauci, “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2.”  And see here and here.  I'm not a scientist or a doctor, but I can see and hear and follow these discussions. We were told none of these things prior to being compelled to take these shots (except by Brett Weinstein, on a video that was pulled down by Youtube).

So here we now are. I am among a growing number of people concerned about the long-term hazards of these treatments, which were touted as "safe." Here are the most recent revelations. First, this discussion involving biologists Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying. The podcast focuses on commentary by Dr. John Campbell, an admission by Dr. Paul Offit and a new Swiss active-surveillance study: "Sex-specific differences in myocardial injury incidence after COVID-19 mRNA-1273 Booster Vaccination."

What do the Pfizer spokesmen not how ro say about the causal pathway from the "safe" vaccination it produced for COVID? They have no public answer. Rather than provide an answer, they purposefully and shamelessly obstruct and deflect:

Notice how they blatantly obstruct and deflect when they were asked for evidence that Pfizer vaccine decreases transmission of COVID from person to person.  They simply don't give a shit about either safety or accuracy of public health pronouncements.

Back to the issue of myocarditis and pericarditis.  First, some definitions.

Myocarditis: "Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle (myocardium). The inflammation can reduce the heart's ability to pump blood. Myocarditis can cause chest pain, shortness of breath, and rapid or irregular heart rhythms (arrhythmias)."

Pericarditis: "Pericarditis is swelling and irritation of the thin, saclike tissue surrounding the heart (pericardium). Pericarditis often causes sharp chest pain. The chest pain occurs when the irritated layers of the pericardium rub against each other."

Commentary by Dr. John Campbell on the new study: Based on this brand new high-quality active surveillance study one person out of 35 who received the Moderna booster incurred vaccine-related heart injuries:

If Regulators around the world don't take notice of the information I'm about to give via this paper, then they are at best in my view negligent at worst they don't even want to think about it. After receiving Moderna booster vaccines in a trial done in Switzerland--there were 777 working people followed up with 777 controls--5.1 percent of those who had the booster vaccine had increased troponins, indicating cardiomyocyte damage. So 5.1% increased cardiac marker damage, chemicals in the blood. 2.8 percent of the 777--that is one in 35--one in 35--had vaccine-associated myocardial injury. Quite astounding and incredible.

This is the result of receiving the Moderna booster. Many of us received two shots prior to receiving the booster. Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying suggest that one who receives all three shots have even higher risk of sustaining heart damage--greater than 1 out of 35 and just because you don't experience short term damage does not mean that you are out of the woods. I was horrified to hear the entire podcast of Weinstein and Heying. If I know there was even a 1 out of 1,000 risk of sustaining heart damage by receiving one shot, I would have refused any of this "treatment." None of us were warned, however. This is the opposite of informed consent.

How many of the elite athletes collapsing (some of them severely injured or dead) were caused by the vaccines? Many people actively do not want to know and do not want to report any of this. What concerns me is that there seems to be a coordinated nonchalance about whether the COVID vaccines are causing the increase in cardiac arrests.

Here is the entire podcast featuring the discussion of Weinstein & Heying:

I posted the John Campbell video on FB with a quote by Campbell. Instead of allowing me to post it, here's what happened:

When you click the "See Why" button:

Who are these "Independent fact-checkers" who know so much more than Dr. John Campbell? Facebook does not disclose this. Are they former employees of the FBI or CIA or DHS? If so, are they consciously adhering to a narrative dictated by the U.S. Government? I'd like to know.

From Linked In:

Nurse currently working in A and E with a demonstrated history in Nurse Education. Skilled in pratical Nursing, Healthcare, Nursing Research, and Health and Educational research. Strong healthcare services professional with two higher degrees and several teaching qualifications. Research record focused in teaching bioscience in national and international nurse education.

More about Campbell . . . 

Continue ReadingDisturbing Revelations about the Pericarditis/Myocarditis Pathway Subsequent to Receiving mRNA COVID Vaccines

Why Hasn’t Pfizer Conducted Random Controlled Studies and Published its Data Sets?

Dr. Vinay Prasad asks why Pfizer refuses to publish its data sets.  And that is merely one red flag of many in a video filled Prasad's damning accusations against Pfizer:

"The FDA is like Pfizer's lap dog. It's a little puppy dog that does whatever Pfizer says. It's enriching Pfizer and screwing the American people...There is no credible data that ever supported the booster that I was compelled by my employer to get at the risk of being fired...We caught them red handed. They slipped up. They gave us a piece of data that they didn't want to give us.". . .  The FDA is like Pfizer's lap dog. It's a little puppy dog that does whatever Pfizer says. It's enriching Pfizer and screwing the American people...It rots the core of public health. I don't trust public health anymore and I am a public health expert...

Continue ReadingWhy Hasn’t Pfizer Conducted Random Controlled Studies and Published its Data Sets?