The Totally Civil Covid Thread. (Closing 31/05)

  • Rand Paul

    Google censored Rand Paul.. opinion piece in Townhall

    This column has been flagged by Google so they can bully us into backing down on publishing the truth. We will not.

    was the censor for "GIF" or "deathwish"?... or perhaps for "hubris"?


    "The coronavirus outbreak brought the world’s attention to the dangers of gain-of-function research.

    This kind of research occurs when a virus is manipulated to increase its strength or contagiousness—

    literally, causing it to gain a function.

    Dr. Anthony Fauci continues to repeat the talking points of the Chinese Communist Party and insists that SARS-CoV-2 spread from bats to an intermediate host animal, then to humans.

    A wet market in Wuhan, China, is allegedly where this “spillover” occurred.

    Yet according to Chinese officials—who have a big incentive to disprove a laboratory accident

    —none of the animals at that market when it closed,

    and none of the animals in its supply chain were infected with SARS-CoV-2.

    In fact, in roughly three years since the pandemic began,

    not one animal has been identified that was infected with the virus before it infected humans.


    In 2018, EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based nonprofit organization, applied for funding from the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

    In its grant application, EcoHealth proposed inserting a “proteolytic cleavage site” into bat coronaviruses that interact with furin, an enzyme in human cells.

    However, DARPA rejected that proposal because adding a furin cleavage site would make the coronavirus more lethal in humans.


    Only 18 months later, COVID-19 appeared in Wuhan—but nowhere else.

    Unlike the original SARS virus and the 2013 avian flu, SARS-CoV-2 didn’t spring up in separate geographic regions

    (as you would expect of a virus circulating in another species).

    Instead, it spread from a single location and seemed well-adapted from the beginning

    to spark a once-in-a-century pandemic.


    Genetically, the feature that equips the virus to replicate so quickly is a furin cleavage site in its spike protein.

    Yet no other SARS-related coronavirus has ever been found in nature exhibiting this feature.


    As we later learned, the Wuhan Institute of Virology partnered with EcoHealth on another project involving gain-of-function experiments on bat coronaviruses.

    However, unlike the project DARPA had rejected, this one found a U.S. government agency willing to fund it: Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

    This is why many in the scientific community believe COVID-19 may have started in a lab

    . In May, two professors at Columbia University wrote in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences), “We do not know whether the insertion of the [furin cleavage site] was the result of natural evolution . . . or was the result of a deliberate introduction . . . into a SARS-like virus as part of a laboratory experiment.

    We do know that the insertion of such [furin cleavage site] sequences into SARS-like viruses was a specific goal of work . . . submitted to [DARPA] . . . We also know that [sic] this research team would be familiar with several previous experiments involving the successful insertion of [a furin cleavage site] sequence into SARS-CoV-1 and other coronaviruses, and they had a lot of experience in the construction of chimeric SARS-like viruses.”


    In other words, while we do not yet know the origins of the pandemic,

    we do know that our government funded gain-of-function research by scientists in Wuhan

    who sought to study coronaviruses by inserting furin cleavage site sequences into them.


    The supposed value of this type of research is to design countermeasures against future pandemics by modeling how viruses might mutate in nature.

    But messenger RNA (mRNA) technology now empowers us to develop vaccines

    within days of sequencing a new pathogen.

    With tools like that at our disposal, why would we create new mutations by guessing which ones might emerge in nature? Taking such a risk is a death wish for the world.


    Rigorous oversight and strict biosafety controls will be imperative if this research technique is to continue in any form. That is why I held the first Senate hearing on gain-of-function research

    and demanded a full investigation into the source of the pandemic.


    I am honored to have been elected as ranking member of the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC).


    Now as ranking member of a major committee, I will hold members of our government accountable if they played any part in this catastrophic act. One thing I have promised since the very beginning of the pandemic is that I will subpoena every last document of Dr. Fauci, and the cover-up will end. If Dr. Fauci himself was complicit in knowledge of the gain of function research done at The Institute of Virology in Wuhan, I will send The Department of Justice a Congressional Criminal Referral, asking that Dr. Fauci be prosecuted. At that point, I would certainly hope that

    Dr. Fauci publicly apologizes to the families who suffered at the hands of NIH, EcoHealth, and his hubris.


    I remain hopeful that we will pursue robust and bipartisan investigations into the origins of COVID-19."

    https://townhall.com/columnist…sh-for-the-world-n2619619"

  • Pungent Ginger Compound Activates Immune System Cell

    Pungent Ginger Compound Activates Immune System Cells
    Looking at the effect of small amounts of a pungent ginger constituent on white blood cells, researchers at the Leibniz Institute for Food Systems Biology at…
    www.trialsitenews.com


    Looking at the effect of small amounts of a pungent ginger constituent on white blood cells, researchers at the Leibniz Institute for Food Systems Biology at the Technical University of Munich found that ginger stimulated the white blood cells, activating the immune system. The study also showed that this process involves a type of receptor that plays a role in the perception of painful heat stimuli and the sensation of spiciness in food.


    Ginger is gaining popularity in Germany, both as a food and a medicine. According to the German Federal Statistical Office, the annual import volume of ginger has almost quadrupled over the last ten years to around 31,600 tons. However, it is unclear whether normal consumption levels of ginger are sufficient to achieve health effects, and if they are which compounds and molecular mechanisms play a role.


    Veronika Somoza, director of the Leibniz Institute, assembled a team to clarify these questions. The starting point was a result of an earlier pilot study, in which first author Gaby Andersen from the Leibniz-LSB TUM also played a key role. The study found that significant amounts of pungent ginger compounds enter the blood about 30 to 60 minutes after consuming one liter of ginger tea. The highest levels were achieved by [6]-gingerol, with plasma concentrations of approximately 7 to 17 micrograms per liter.


    Ginger is known to exert its "taste" effect via the so-called TRPV1 receptor, an ion channel located on the surface of nerve cells that responds to painful heat stimuli as well as to pungent spicy compounds. Other studies have suggested that white blood cells also possess this receptor, hence the research team tested whether [6]-gingerol influences the activity of these immune cells.


    The team succeeded in detecting the receptor on neutrophil granulocytes. These cells make up about two-thirds of white blood cells and serve to combat invading bacteria. Further laboratory experiments by the research group also showed that even a very low concentration of almost 15 micrograms of [6]-gingerol per liter is sufficient to put the cells on heightened alert. Thus, compared to control cells, the stimulated cells reacted about 30 percent more strongly to a peptide that simulates a bacterial infection. Addition of a TRPV1 receptor-specific inhibitor reversed the effect induced by [6]-gingerol.


    Gaby Andersen said these experiments showed “very low [6]-gingerol concentrations are sufficient to affect the activity of immune cells via the TRPV1 receptor. In blood, these concentrations could theoretically be achieved by consuming about one liter of ginger tea. So, our results support the assumption that the intake of common amounts of ginger may be sufficient to modulate cellular responses of the immune system.”


    Home

  • Gives support to the tea with lemon, ginger and honey for a quick flu recovery.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • There are two problems with this type of herbs. If they work as antibodies, then the cellular immune response will not work or just a bit giving you no future immunity.

    So plants that mimic ivermectin and block viral replication are much better. The other problem is extracts contain hundreds of chemicals and it is difficult to find the component that works as antibody or as enzyme...And some components may have unwanted effects :sleeping: || ...


    Plants are great for therapy and may be best if you carry virus in the guts! Known - confirmed by studies - to work fine: Black cumin!

    I've given some thought to your two problems, Both problems are overcome with high dose vitamin D. Vitamin D will prevent histamine intolerance. Throw in some L arginine for N.O. release

  • CDC USA has been taken over by NAZI's Dr. Mengele team! :evil: :evil: :evil:


    Children’s Health Defense responds to CDC officially adding Covid shots to the recommended schedule
    Washington, D.C. — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced in a press release updated recommendations to the immunization schedules,…
    www.thedesertreview.com


    Covid vaxx & bosters mandatory from 6 months. But so for for breast feeding...

  • OBGYN reveals damning data on miscarriage and fertility rates in bombshell interview | Video


    By Sonia Elijah


    I had the pleasure of interviewing Dr Kim Biss, a practicing obstetrician & and gynecologist from St. Petersburg, Florida, one of the very few OBGYNs speaking out against the COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women. During the interview, she revealed damning data with regards to miscarriage and fertility rates seen in her practice, post mRNA vaccine roll-out.


    The average month to month miscarriage rate in 2020 was 4%. In 2021, it jumped 7-8%, roughly doubling in 2022 to 15%. By December of that year, it reached 25%.


    Data from her practice, also revealed how the number of registered newly pregnant patients have gone down year-to-year, which is a telling sign of the fertility rate. When asked if this phenomenon had anything to do with the novel mRNA shots- she was quick to respond, “Absolutely- this is global- we are seeing the birth rate down, globally.”


    Dr Biss explained how the lipid nanoparticles (LPNs) encapsulating the mRNA are lipophilic (having an affinity for lipids) and the effect they have on the ovaries is unknown. Dr Biss went on to discuss Anti-Phospholipid Syndrome (an auto-immune condition where the body makes antibodies to certain phospholipids) which some of the vaccine-injured are suffering from.


    The OBGYN pointed out the following alarming facts and raised some important questions:


    Pfizer and BioNTech knew early on that the mRNA shots did not stay in the deltoid muscle but travel all over the body.

    The mRNA shots cross the placenta to the foetus.

    The possibility the ovaries inside the female foetuses can absorb the vaccinal lipid nanoparticles from their vaccinated mothers.

    Based on this: could there be a multi-generational issue with fertility?

    Dr Biss raised the argument that pregnant women were not at higher risk of hospitalization and mortality from COVID-19. This was observed first-hand from her practice, since 2020. Furthermore, a paper by Pineles et al., published in Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal in 2021 found ‘a substantially lower rate of in-hospital mortality in pregnant patients than nonpregnant patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and viral pneumonia.’


    “There was no reason, in my opinion, to recommend our pregnant population get these injections, with something so new and not even studied properly on animals.”


    She also discussed the major flaws in the pivotal study on pregnant women and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in April 2021.


    “If you took the number of women who miscarried in the first trimester and divided it by the appropriate denominator- this miscarriage rate was 80%!”


    Dr Biss went on to reveal the shocking fact that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists received substantial funding in 2021, the same year they strongly recommended the mRNA shots for pregnant women.


    On doing further research, I found that Pfizer happened to be an ACOG Bronze level supporter in 2021.


    OBGYN reveals damning data on miscarriage and fertility rates in bombshell interview
    I had the pleasure of interviewing Dr Kim Biss, a practicing obstetrician & and gynaecologist from St. Petersburg, Florida, one of the very few OBGYNs speaking…
    rumble.com

  • 20230201_Zinberg_FreedomWinsStateswithLessRestrictiveCOVIDPoliciesOutperformedStateswithMoreRestrictiveCOVIDPolicies_FINAL_202302091645.pdf (paragoninstitute.org)


    Introduction:


    The COVID-19 pandemic led to government interventions into the social and economic structures of our society that were unprecedented in their severity and duration. The fact that different states and localities took different approaches to imposing these measures created an opportunity to determine whether these interventions improved health outcomes, what economic and social side effects the interventions caused, and whether the interventions influenced people’s decisions about where to live.


    This paper compares a quantitative measure of government interventions from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker—a systematic collection of information on policy measures that governments have taken to combat COVID-19—to health, economic, and educational outcome measures in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. We use the Government Response Index, which is the Oxford researchers’ most comprehensive index.


    Our results show that more severe government interventions, as measured by the Oxford index, did not significantly improve health outcomes (age-adjusted and pre-existing-condition adjusted COVID mortality and all-cause excess mortality) in states that imposed them relative to states that imposed less restrictive measures. But the severity of the government response was strongly correlated with worse economic (increased unemployment and decreased GDP) and educational (days of in-person schooling) outcomes and with a worse overall COVID outcomes score that equally weighted the health, economic, and educational outcomes.


    We also used Census data on domestic migration to examine whether government pandemic measures affected state-to-state migration decisions. We compared the net change in migration into or out of states in the pandemic period between July 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, with the migration patterns over five pre-pandemic years. There was a substantial increase in domestic migration during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic trends. There was also a significant negative correlation between states’ government response measures and states’ net pandemic migration, suggesting that people fled states with more severe lockdowns and moved to states with less severe measures

  • Did Biden Administration Pay Physician Networks to Push COVID-19 Vaccine Prematurely?

    TrialSiteNews | Where Life Sciences Research Meets the World
    Transparent coverage of clinical research
    www.trialsitenews.com

    prematurely-bcf50597


    By March 2021, as part of the Biden administration’s emergency countermeasure efforts involving COVID-19 vaccines, the administration handed out nearly $10 billion in money to influential groups across American society such as physician societies to advocate and aggressively promote the vaccines across low-income and underserved communities as part of the COVID-19 response. The targeted cohort would include pregnant women and their gestating babies. The logic behind these massive injections of funds into various groups of interest was, of course, that COVID-19 vaccination was the best way to protect people against COVID-19 infection. Data was just emerging at this time during the Delta variant predominance that the COVID-19 vaccines, while reducing the probability of morbidity and mortality, was by no means stopping viral transmission. Furthermore, the safety data was not well understood, and in fact, still remains unclear, especially when it comes to pregnant women and their gestating babies, lactation, and very young children per the to date Food and Drug Administration package inserts.


    Part of Biden administration’s nearly $10 billion COVID-19 vaccine promotional campaign included the launching of “COVID-19 Community Corps”, a nationwide grassroots network of local voices people know and trust to encourage Americans to get vaccinated. In April 2021, Vice President Kamala Harris and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy met with founding members to launch the initiative.


    A total of $6,113,504,125 was injected into 1,377 health centers, hence the intense push to promote the vaccine and unfortunately, suppression of any critical information.


    Various detailed information is provided by the Health Resources & Services Administration here. A founding member was the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)—the group received money, and as it happens, was literally the very first organization to declare that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe for pregnant women and gestating babies.


    It’s also worth pointing out that in 2021, Pfizer happened to be one of ACOG’s ‘Bronze’ level Champion supporters.


    ACOG, along with the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), issued a joint press release on July 30, 2021 making this declaration, despite the complete lack of safety data.


    How could they make such a leap of faith? Assuming the best, physicians in the influential medical societies had some to the conclusion that the risks (albeit not quantitatively described in any meaningful way) of COVID-19 infection markedly outweighed the risks of COVID-19 vaccination. But there was just one problem: those risks were not known.


    By August 23, 2021, ACOG went on the record recommending the vaccines again, but this time declaring because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted licensure to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2/Comirnaty), that this was also an assurance that the product was safe for pregnant women and gestating babies.


    However, to this day, for the Pfizer BNT162/b2 /Comirnaty package insert the FDA acknowledges that the only data evidencing safety is an experiment on 44 female rats.


    What is highly note-worthy is that the section ‘Use in pregnancy and lactation’ (see screenshot below) was excluded from Pfizer’s original Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports, submitted to the FDA. In the Pfizer amended version (approved on 30 April, 2021) and in the subsequent reissue, 413 adverse cases were reported with 84 classified as serious. Alarmingly, 238 cases out of the 270 pregnancies- ‘no outcome was provided.’ Of the remaining known 32 cases, 23 were reported as spontaneous abortion (miscarriage).




    Thus, an unprecedented move was made, first by two prominent medical societies (ACOG & SMFM) then by the CDC and the FDA. Throwing away all standard protocol, a full court press was on to get a highly vulnerable population vaccinated with the novel mRNA vaccines despite the lack of safety data.


    Timeline of Safety Declarations for Pregnancy & COVID Vaccination

    As previously mentioned, the very first declaration of recommendation of use of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines on pregnant women was a joint statement on July 30, 2021 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), the two leading organizations representing specialists in obstetric care.


    The duo recommended that all “pregnant individuals be vaccinated against COVID-19” before any health authorities, including the FDA and the CDC had issued their statements.


    As TrialSite has chronicled, this move ostensibly was due to concerns that pregnant women were prone to more severe COVID-19. Again, this presumption wasn’t based on formal randomized study but rather originates less than scientifically valid CDC survey data and the unorthodox licensure of Comirnaty.


    By August 23, 2021, ACOG issued a press release further elaborating on safety: the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were safe for pregnant women and their gestating babies because of the FDA’s “licensure of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine.”


    While on July 30, both ACOG and SMFM made the recommendation, a leap of faith, based on nebulous observations in the field by the CDC, they now came to market with a press release backed by a stronger declaration--that it was this licensure action by the FDA leading this important medical society to conclude that the novel products were safe for pregnant women and gestating babies.


    Martin Tucker, MD, FACOG, president of ACOG, declared:

    “With today’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licensure of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine, clinicians can feel even more confident in recommending vaccination for their patients, including pregnant patients. All eligible individuals, including those who are pregnant, should feel similarly confident in being vaccinated against COVID-19.”


    So, at the time the decision was based on the one hand, rising hospitalizations of pregnant women associated with what was mostly the Delta variant of interest in circulation at the time, and on the other hand, the FDA’s unorthodox “approval” of the vaccine product.


    While the FDA declared Comirnaty approved, in granting licensure they bifurcated the action in a bizarre unorthodox move, declaring that the product BNT162b2 under emergency use authorization (EUA) would be the only vaccine in circulation in America—but that this didn’t matter. See TrialSite’s “FDA Approval of Pfizer Puts Consumers in Ultimate Squeeze: PREP ACT Liability Shields Ongoing Wile Fed and State Local Authorities Now Force Vaccinations.”


    So ACOG, a recipient of money from the Biden administration to promote the COVID-19 vaccines, issued a strong recommendation for a vulnerable cohort despite the lack of data. Note as well, that it would be over a month before the CDC would recommend that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective, bypassing all traditional protocol. The CDC always follows its decisions based on FDA safety decisions. This never happened in this case.


    To this day, the FDA’s formal stance on the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine as represented in the package insert remains nebulous.


    Declaring that there was a study showing safety on female rats, the agency charged with protecting the health of the American public first positions a generalized risk for birth defect, loss, or other adverse outcomes regardless of vaccination. This background information is used to frame the discussion of risks and benefits.


    To this day, this is the agency’s formal stance as represented in the package insert for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine:


    “Available data on COMIRNATY administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy.”

    Evidencing the uncertain nature of the safety situation, the agency promulgates that a pregnant person’s registry is available to track the data—known as the “Mother to Baby” registry of pregnant women who have received the COVID-19 vaccines. See TrialSite’s “Games Regulators Play as Pfizer FDA Authorization Not Fully That.” Also see TrialSite’s “On What Basis are Pregnant Women being Encouraged to Take the Pfizer Vaccine.”


    Back ACOG and SMFM: how could these prestigious medical societies make such an announcement, declaring high confidence of safety for pregnant women and gestating babies, basing the decision in part, on less than scientifically valid CDC survey data—even before the unorthodox FDA licensure of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine when the FDA itself declared then, and continues to promulgate formally they don’t have enough information to know what the risks are in the first place?


    In fact, how can a proper risk benefit analysis be conducted, or understood by the health care provider population, let alone the masses if there is a lack of data to conduct the risk analysis in the first place?


    Enter the $10 billion injection, of which ACOG was a recipient. Did this taxpayer-based cash injection influence decisions?


    Importantly, as TrialSite has communicated in the past, the FDA’s package inserts are just as nebulous when it comes to lactation and young children. For lactation, the agency states under 8.2 Risk Summary:


    “It is not known whether COMIRNATY is excreted in human milk. Data are not available to assess the effects of COMIRNATY on the breastfed infant or on milk production/excretion. The developmental and health benefits of breastfeeding should be considered along with the mother’s clinical need for COMIRNATY and any potential adverse effects on the breastfed child from COMIRNATY or from the underlying maternal condition. For preventive vaccines, the underlying maternal condition is susceptibility to disease prevented by the vaccine.”


    And what about children?


    “The safety and effectiveness of COMIRNATY in individuals younger than 12 years of age have not been established.”


    This, even though now the CDC has incorporated the COVID-19 vaccines into the standard vaccination schedule for children as young as 6 months old.


    What follows is a timeline of events involving pregnancy and COVID-19 vaccines:


    Date


    Summary/Link


    July 30, 2021


    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), the two leading organizations representing specialists in obstetric care, recommend that all pregnant individuals be vaccinated against COVID-19



    August 9, 2021


    ACOG issues strong statement in favor of COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant women


    August 23, 2021


    ACOG further recommends due to FDA licensure of the COVID-19 vaccines (package inserts declare there is not enough data to know what risks are for pregnant women, however).


    September 29, 2021


    CDC health advisory that safe benefits of COVID vaccines outweigh risks despite the fact that regulators are on the record in package insert that there is a lack of sufficient data. Link 2


    Several outstanding questions remain.


    Are the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines safe for pregnant women, gestating babies, lactation, and for very small children? If so, why hasn’t the FDA updated its package inserts?


    Did the $10 billion plus other funding such as $2.1 billion from the CDC to healthcare providers for COVID vaccine promotion influence physician societies and boards to make recommendations despite the lack of data?


    Was it ethical, moral, and even legal for the physician societies to recommend the vaccines before the regulatory process?

  • It's all about vitamin D! Vitamin D is the key!!!


    Multiple Sclerosis discovery could end disease’s chronic inflammation

    Multiple Sclerosis discovery could end disease’s chronic inflammation
    UVA finding suggests new treatment approach for MS and other autoimmune diseases.
    www.newsleader.com


    Scientists have struggled to understand the causes of MS, but recent research suggests an important role for the gut microbiome.


    UVA’s new findings bolster that, determining that an immune system controller found in “barrier tissues” such as the intestine plays a vital role in the disease. This regulator can reprogram the gut microbiome to promote harmful, chronic inflammation, researchers found.


    Vitamin D, Vitamin D Receptor, and Tissue Barriers

    Vitamin D, Vitamin D Receptor, and Tissue Barriers - PubMed
    Tissue barriers are critical in the pathogenesis of human diseases, such as atopic dermatitis, inflammatory bowel diseases, and various cancers. Preserving or…
    pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

  • Similar In-Hospital and 30-day Outcomes for Omicron and Influenza

    No Observable Benefit of Vaccination Campaigns in the Elderly

    Similar In-Hospital and 30-day Outcomes for Omicron and Influenza
    No Observable Benefit of Vaccination Campaigns in the Elderly
    petermcculloughmd.substack.com


    By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH


    Clinical concerns over both COVID-19 and influenza should have remained on the vulnerable elderly population, particularly those in senior centers. Instead we have seen a two-year media blitz on vaccinating young healthy working age persons and children. Portmann and colleagues published a sobering report on hospitalized cases of Omicron and Influenza A/B infections in Switzerland. The in-hospital mortality rates were 7.0 and 4.4% with 8.5 and 15.3% incurring cardiovascular events in the SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A/B groups, respectively. This translated into nearly identical outcomes (ICU admission and death) at 30 days in both groups. There appeared to be no impact of antecedent vaccination for either disease but for different reasons. The COVID-19 vaccinations failed to stop hospitalization with the majority having been immunized. There was no statistical difference in death among those vaccinated verses not, 7.2 vs 9.3%, p=0.05, respectively. Influenza vaccination appeared to have no impact because of very poor utilization (10%) with considerable missing data.

  • Vaccine Activist Group Sues to Get VAERS Analyses: “Incredible Level of Harm”?

    Vaccine Activist Group Sues to Get VAERS Analyses: “Incredible Level of Harm”?
    In a February 17 legal update, the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), a nonprofit activist group considered “anti-vax” by mainstream but one…
    www.trialsitenews.com


    In a February 17 legal update, the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), a nonprofit activist group considered “anti-vax” by mainstream but one of the most active groups forcing information disclosures from the U.S. government in association with the COVID-19 countermeasure response reports on the status of two lawsuits seeking disclosure of legally required VAERS analyses. Although considered “anti-vaxers,” ICAN’s efforts may well lead to increased transparency which will benefit the public. They note that on June 30, 2022 they submitted about 20 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to both the FDA and the CDC seeking analyses they were required to do based on VAERS’ Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for SARS-CoV-2. To date, ICAN has filed two lawsuits over three of the FOIA, and they allege that they have already uncovered damning data: “They reflect that the CDC’s own pre-determined analysis of VAERS data showed COVID-19 vaccines were causing an incredible level of harm.” CDC’s response is that a separate FDA analysis demonstrates that CDC’s identification of widespread injuries is “not concerning.” Yet FDA is still fighting to keep its data out of the public realm.


    FDA Denies Possession of Records

    One key request sought all, “reports of possible concern based on [] data mining results” that FDA had been required to share CDC according to the SOP. After a denial by FDA and its appeal process, ICAN sued FDA on January 13, 2023. A separate request sought records relating to “Empirical Bayesian data mining” which is mandated by the SOP. Asserting that these records are “opinions, recommendations, and policy discussions,” FDA denied the request. Eventually ICAN filed yet another suit on January 25, 2023. Per the SOP, Propositional Reporting Ratio (PRR) analyses were to be done, “to identify AEs [adverse events] that are disproportionately reported relative to other AEs.” To ICAN’s surprise, FDA responded that it did not have any records that would be covered by the request.


    House of Cards?

    Yet a letter from CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky to Senator Ron Johnson said otherwise by stating that, “CDC performed PRR analysis between March 2022 through July 31, 2022, to corroborate the results of EB data mining.” And after ICAN sued for PRR-related materials, the Epoch Times reported that, strangely, that the outlet did get the PRR analyses from CDC based on its own FOIA—and this is data that ICAN had been told did not even exist. According to ICAN, “the analyses show alarming safety signals.” Dr. Walensky’s letter to Sen. Johnson included that, “Notably, results from PRR analysis were generally consistent with EB [Empirical Bayesian] data mining [conducted by the FDA]….” ICAN supposes that the Bayesian data mining records are being withheld as they likely support the “shocking” PRR data. So, CDC is relying on FDA information to claim that its own PRR data in not of concern, yet the latter agency won’t release this information. To quote ICAN, “If FDA’s Empirical Bayesian analysis also shows the same level of harm, then the entire CDC/FDA house of cards regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety will come crashing down

  • mRNA IP Wars Go to Court 2024—Make No Mistake: Follow the Money

    mRNA IP Wars Go to Court 2024—Make No Mistake: Follow the Money
    Pfizer and BioNTech SE prepare for legal war against Moderna, a battle to take place at London’s High Court over conflicting views of intellectual…
    www.trialsitenews.com


    Pfizer and BioNTech SE prepare for legal war against Moderna, a battle to take place at London’s High Court over conflicting views of intellectual property (patent) rights associated with the COVID-19 vaccines developed and supported by taxpayer money in America at least in regard to Moderna’s mRNA-1273. A preliminary hearing at the High Court just occurred as the litigants prepare for the big-stakes IP trial commencing April 2024. While Moderna first sued the American and German companies for patent rights usurpation among other claims, the duo sued the Cambridge, Massachusetts biotech in London court in a bid to revoke two of Moderna’s patients associated with the sought-after, high revenue generating messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines targeting SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19. Exploiting the pandemic, Pfizer played hardball with nation-states worldwide, driving many tens of billions in revenue. Note Germany’s CureVac has also sued Pfizer-BioNTech for patent infringement, demanding financial damages. In the early stages of the pandemic when MAGA met mRNA, then-President Trump tried to cut an exclusive deal with CureVac.


    This apex legal power in the UK is also known as “His Majesty’s High Court of Justice in England.” Along with the UK Court of Appeal and the Crown Court, they represent the Senior Courts of England and Wales. This legal forum is the place with high-value and high-importance civil law cases are heard, with supervisory jurisdiction over all subordinate courts and tribunals, with few statutory exceptions.


    mRNA Legal Entanglements

    Separate lawsuits are also ongoing, and unfolding in multiple nations, from the United States to Germany and even Holland. Moderna, founded in 2010, filed actions in Germany and America back in August, seeking damages in the form of not surprisingly, lots of money. BioNTech benefits from Pfizer’s legal war chest, as countersued in America. The whole affair was covered recently by Reuters.


    But other ventures are involved with a spaghetti tangle of litigation associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. For example, German biotech and mRNA developer CureVac founded in 2000, sued the Pfizer/BioNTech pair in American courts and the London High Court.


    Early in Pandemic: MAGA Meets mRNA

    Remember TrialSite reported the first mRNA producer the American government under Trump approached was CureVac. Trump wanted an exclusive for the American population first which in a time of global pandemic seemed a bit too nationalistic and provincial for CureVac leadership and investor taste.


    Say what you want about mRNA, and the developers and investors behind the technology: follow the money to discover the ultimate driver behind the pandemic response.

  • Pfizer and BioNTech SE prepare for legal war against Moderna, a battle to take place at London’s High Court over conflicting views of intellectual property (patent) rights associated with the COVID-19 vaccines developed and supported by taxpayer money in America at least in regard to Moderna’s mRNA-1273.

    What shall this mean? Crocks against an US bio weapon lab? Biontec has zero vaccine knowledge but Moderna did produce a much better approach to a vaccine than Biontec that only did mix dangerous stuff (classic cancer RNA gene therapy) and sold it without any real tests.

  • What shall this mean? Crocks against an US bio weapon lab? Biontec has zero vaccine knowledge and did produce a much better approach to a vaccine than Biontec that only did mix dangerous stuff (classic cancer RNA gene therapy) and sold it without any real tests.

    simply put moderna filed and recieved a pattern in 2016 for mRNA vaccine technology. The united states' paid the crooks billions to develope and promote theirs. Not happy with the results and they want their money back. Simple

  • External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • It's all about vitamin D! Vitamin D is the key!!!


    Israeli scientists find groundbreaking approach for treating Alzheimer’s - study

    Israeli scientists find groundbreaking approach for treating Alzheimer’s
    An Alzheiber's treatment porposed by Israeli scientists targets mitochondrial gatekeeper, controlling deterioration of cells.
    m.jpost.com


    Growing evidence points to a metabolic impairment in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) patients, whose number worldwide is projected to reach 135 million by 2050. Neurology researchers say AD starts to develop several decades before the onset of dementia and the deterioration of cognitive function.


    Reduced metabolism results from a dysfunction of the mitochondria, which produce most of the energy in cells. It is also involved in cell death, inflammation and immune response. Even though AD is linked to mitochondrial dysfunction, there are no current drug candidates that target this aspect. Researchers at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beersheba are proposing a new treatment approach by targeting the mitochondrial gatekeeper – the voltage-dependent anion channel-1 (VDAC1) – which controls mitochondrial activity and cell life and death


    Vitamin D Receptor Is Necessary for Mitochondrial Function and Cell Health

    Vitamin D Receptor Is Necessary for Mitochondrial Function and Cell Health
    Vitamin D receptor (VDR) mediates many genomic and non-genomic effects of vitamin D. Recently, the mitochondrial effects of vitamin D have been characterized…
    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


    Vitamin D Modulation of Mitochondrial Oxidative Metabolism and mTOR Enforces Stress Adaptations and Anticancer Responses

    Vitamin D Modulation of Mitochondrial Oxidative Metabolism and mTOR Enforces Stress Adaptations and Anticancer Responses
    The relationship between the active form of vitamin D[3] (1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D, 1,25(OH)[2] D) and reactive oxygen species (ROS), two integral signaling…
    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


    Dementia Linked to Vitamin D Deficiency, Study Shows

    Dementia Linked to Vitamin D Deficiency, Study Shows
    Boosting low vitamin D levels to normal ranges could help protect the brain against a loss of thinking skills as people age, the study authors wrote.
    www.webmd.com

  • they really are trying to kill us!


    PFAS Chemical Suppresses White Blood Cell’s Ability to Kill Invading Pathogens

    PFAS Chemical Suppresses White Blood Cell’s Ability to Kill Invading Pathogens
    In a new study, researchers from North Carolina State University discovered that the PFAS chemical GenX suppresses what is called the “neutrophil…
    www.trialsitenews.com


    In a new study, researchers from North Carolina State University discovered that the PFAS chemical GenX suppresses what is called the “neutrophil respiratory burst” – the method white blood cells known as neutrophils use to kill invading pathogens. The study adds to a growing body of knowledge in how both legacy and emerging PFAS chemicals can affect the body’s innate immune system. The findings were published in the Journal of Immunotoxicology.


    PFAS are a class of per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals used to make consumer and industrial products more resistant to water, stains and grease. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, there are more than 12,000 known PFAS, which also include fluoroethers such as GenX.


    Human exposure to these compounds is commonplace due to their presence in surface and drinking water – it is estimated that PFASs contaminate the drinking water of ∼200 million Americans and are detectable in the serum of 98% of Americans.


    Drake Phelps, former Ph.D, student at North Carolina State University, and first author of the study said it has been well established that PFAS are toxic to the adaptive immune system. However, their effects on the innate immune system are not well known, he said.


    The human immune system has two branches: adaptive and innate. The adaptive branch contains T cells and B cells that “remember” pathogens the body has encountered, but it is slow to mount a defense, acting days – sometimes weeks – after it detects a pathogen.


    The innate immune system serves as the body’s first line of defense, dispatching white blood cells to the site of an invasion within hours. These white blood cells include neutrophils, which can dump microbicidal reactive oxygen species directly onto pathogens, killing them. This process is called the respiratory burst.


    For this research, Drake and colleagues looked at the effect of nine environmentally relevant legacy and emerging PFAS on neutrophils from zebrafish embryos, neutrophil-like cells (cells that can be chemically treated to behave like neutrophils), and human neutrophil cells cultured from donor blood. The embryos and cells were exposed to 80 micromolar solutions of each chemical.


    Emerging PFAS are chemicals, like GenX, developed to replace older, legacy PFAS that have proven to be toxic. All the PFAS included in this study were detected in both the Cape Fear River and the blood serum of residents whose drinking water came from the Cape Fear River, located in North Carolina.


    Of the nine PFAS tested, only GenX suppressed the neutrophil respiratory burst in embryonic zebrafish, neutrophil-like cells, and human neutrophils. PFHxA also suppressed the respiratory burst, but only in embryonic zebrafish and neutrophil-like cells.


    “The longest chemical exposure in our study was four days, so obviously we can’t compare that to real human exposure of four decades,” says Jeff Yoder, professor of comparative immunology at NC State and corresponding author of the work. “We looked at a high dose of single PFAS over a short period, whereas people in the Cape Fear River basin were exposed to a mixture of PFAS – a low dose over a long period.


    “So while we can say that we see a toxic effect from a high dose in the cell lines, we can’t yet say what effects long-term exposure may ultimately have on the immune system,” he said.


    Forever chemicals are now found in 7out of 10 people in the united states. Forever chemicals destroy vitamin D expression in the human body.


  • External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • CDC USA has been taken over by NAZI's Dr. Mengele team!

    not just the CDC but the AAP 67000 pediatricians

    American Academy of Pediatrics


    In Bigpharma we Trust

    E Pluribus Venenum


    1. mRNA vaccine


    the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended two COVID-19 vaccines:

    one for children ages 6 months to 4 years and one for ages 6 months to 5 years.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) supports this recommendation and encourages pediatricians to promote vaccination and give COVID-19 vaccines.

    The AAP urges families to check with their pediatrician 

    and community health care providers about how to get their children vaccinated.

    Pediatricians applaud the authorization

    Speaking at the ACIP meeting, pediatrician Yvonne "Bonnie" Maldonado, MD, FAAP, chair of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases, emphasized the importance of these vaccines for the youngest members of our community, who have waited the longest for this protection.

    "Pediatricians know the power of vaccines to protect infants, children, adolescents and entire communities against deadly and debilitating infectious diseases," Dr. Maldonado said. "We've successfully immunized millions of children and adolescents to protect them from COVID-19. Families with infants and toddlers need and deserve the same chance to protect their children against this virus.


    2. Ozempic for life..

    This month, the American Academy of Pediatrics released its first comprehensive guidelines for evaluating and treating children and adolescents with obesity. The paper, co-written by 21 prominent doctors, health researchers and obesity experts, advises health care providers that they may refer children as young as 2 years old to “intensive health behavior and lifestyle treatment” programs if they have a body mass index in the overweight or obese range. For children ages 12 and up with an obese B.M.I., doctors are encouraged to prescribe weight-loss medications and to offer those over age 13 with severe obesity a referral to a bariatric surgery center.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.