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

Australian Excess Deaths Surge While COVID-19 Deaths Down—Could there be Link to COVID-19 Vaccination?

Australian Excess Deaths Surge While COVID-19 Deaths Down—Could there be Link to COVID-19 Vaccination?

Recently the Australian Bureau of Statistics released the latest “Provisional Mortality Statistics” a report revieing provisional deaths data as…

www.trialsitenews.com

Recently the Australian Bureau of Statistics released the latest “Provisional Mortality Statistics” a report revieing provisional deaths data as part of an ongoing effort to measure changes in patterns of mortality. This latest period is for the entire year of 2022. The agency Down Under reports there were 190,394 deaths that occurred by December 31, 2022, representing a 25,235 (15.3%) excess over a historical average.

When looking at “age-standardized death rate” or “SDR” for December 2022 this equaled 43.2 deaths per 100,000 people, well above the baseline average of 40.9. The Australian government reports 707 deaths due to COVID-19 in January 2021, down from 924 that occurred from the novel pathogen in December.

Near Universal COVID-19 Vaccination

The data just isn’t easily explainable. The nation is nearly fully vaccinated against COVID-19. 97% of the eligible population has received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. With 95.2% of the eligible population fully vaccination.

So, What’s going On?

The Australian agency provides a preliminary overview of mortality at the all-cause level for all deaths as well as by selected cause for doctor-certified deaths in 2022. There are some deaths that occurred in 2022 that have not yet been registered and received by the ABS. These deaths will be included in future reports. Causes of death are not presented for coroner-referred deaths (except for COVID-19) due to the time required to complete coronial investigations. More complete analysis on deaths and causes of death registered in 2022 will be published in Deaths, Australia and Causes of Death, Australia in late 2023.

There were 190,394 deaths that occurred in 2022 and were registered by 28 February 2023. All months had a higher number of deaths compared to the preceding 3 years.

Could the mass COVID-19 vaccination program be linked to this excess death rate? Could it be some other explanation?

COVID-19 deaths are down from a year earlier (although they have been on an upswing in the last calendar quarter of 2022), yet the excess death rate surged.

Provisional Mortality Statistics, Jan - Dec 2022

Provisional deaths data for measuring changes in patterns of mortality

www.abs.gov.au

COVID shot damage report reveals alarming human and economic cost

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A recent analysis report conservatively estimates that in 2022 alone, out of 148 million people, the mass COVID-19 inoculations injured 26.6…

www.thedesertreview.com

USA:: 150 billion damage from Vaxxines 100 Billion net gain by Pfizer & friends...

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A recent analysis report conservatively estimates that in 2022 alone, out of 148 million people, the mass COVID-19 inoculations injured 26.6 million, disabled 1.36 million, and caused 300,000 excess deaths, with an estimated economic cost of nearly $150 billion.

The 2022 Vaccine Damage Report is a culmination of one year’s worth of data compiled by former Wall Street analyst Ed Dowd and his team at the research firm, Phinance Technologies. The report reveals the injuries, disabilities and deaths, or “human cost,” of the COVID-19 “vaccine” program in the United States for the year 2022. The research team focused their research on the 148 million employed Americans between the ages of 16 to 64.

Regarding full-time workers who had mild or moderate injuries that led to lower productivity at work, there was a 50 percent increase in lost worktime rates from 2019 to 2022, 28 percent increase in absence rates, and an estimated 26.6 million individuals affected.

This is what's cooming!

They keep finding what Covid does but never give the reason. Vitamin d is the key!!!

Long COVID' neurological symptoms traced to infected immune cells: Japan researchers

'Long COVID' neurological symptoms traced to infected immune cells: Japan researchers - The Mainichi

TOKYO -- Nerve disorder symptoms experienced by some COVID-19 patients may be caused by the infection of immune system cells that clean up the brain,

mainichi.jp

TOKYO -- Nerve disorder symptoms experienced by some COVID-19 patients may be caused by the infection of immune system cells that clean up the brain, a research team at Tokyo's Keio University has found.

People battling long-term effects of a coronavirus infection or so-called "long COVID" sometimes exhibit symptoms associated with central nervous system damage, such as convulsions, cognitive impairment, and "brain fog," a catchall term that includes low concentration, forgetfulness, confusion, and slowed thinking.

The coronavirus can enter the brain, but it is difficult for it to invade nerve cells themselves, and the mechanism for how the brain was infected had remained a mystery. What was known was that COVID-19 patients experienced a buildup of inflammatory substances in their brains.

Neuron-Specific Vitamin D Signaling Attenuates Microglia Activation and CNS Autoimmunity

Neuron-Specific Vitamin D Signaling Attenuates Microglia Activation and CNS Autoimmunity

Low vitamin D during childhood is associated with an increased risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS) as an adult. Given that vitamin D has…

www.frontiersin.org

Germany post vaxx clinic flooded by vaxxine damage claims:: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/rh…ac-ambulanz-18796703.html

7000 waiting some hundred newly added to list every day....

React19 Launches New Nationwide Electronic Referral Network for COVID-19 Vaccine Injured

React19 Launches New Nationwide Electronic Referral Network for COVID-19 Vaccine Injured

"React19" partners with closed-loop care coordination and referral platform "CrossTx" and biomedical-focused media network TrialSite News to develop the first…

www.trialsitenews.com

React19" partners with closed-loop care coordination and referral platform "CrossTx" and biomedical-focused media network TrialSite News to develop the first ever provider, social supports and mental health network for the vaccine-injured across the United States with an eye on international expansion.

CrossTx, a leading healthcare technology company headquartered in Bozeman, Montana, and React19, a science-based non-profit offering financial, physical and emotional support for those suffering from long-term COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, announce the launch of the nation's first bi-directional referral network for persons injured by the COVID-19 vaccines.

This novel network, digitizing a nascent, existing network React19 has developed, supports hundreds of thousands to millions of people injured by COVID-19 vaccines by connecting the injured seamlessly and efficiently to supportive clinical and mental health providers, legal assistance, financial support and other vital supportive assistance.

Patients injured by COVID-19 vaccines face an uphill struggle as a majority of healthcare systems today still don't formally acknowledge a spectrum of vaccine-related injury, from moderately impactful to completely debilitating. Individuals injured by COVID-19 vaccines typically must visit dozens of doctors before they are able to find the appropriate provider and care access. Unfortunately, far too many people who signed up to take the vaccine to combat the pandemic experienced unfortunate debilitating injuries.

With an electronic care coordination and referral network, CrossTx and React19 now collaborate to fill a vitally important gap in care---the lack of adequate medical, behavioral health and social supports necessary to care for a substantial vulnerable population.

Through this partnership, individuals who have been negatively impacted by COVID-19 vaccines can connect with supportive medical professionals, access specialized care and receive referrals to other resources and support networks based on needs, geography and coverage options. This state-of-the-art platform provides a comprehensive database of resources, including information about legal and financial assistance, as well as mental health and wellness support.

React19 partner TrialSite Inc. envisioned a national, if not global, electronic network bringing together seamlessly and efficiently COVID-19 vaccine injured patients and providers. The vision comes from a similar project TrialSite and CrossTx just launching in El Paso, Texas, where the care coordination and referral network efficiently brings together health care providers and local research centers to drive more clinical trials participation in the region.

With over a decade of experience delivering referral management and care coordination solutions to healthcare systems, CrossTx and React19 collaborate to launch a robust, extensible, secure and compliant React19 COVID-19 vaccine injured referral network. React19, the largest organization of its kind, brings its extensive network of not only COVID-19 vaccine injured (approaching 50,000 people) but also the medical professionals, advocates and resources necessary to ensure that injured individuals can access the best possible care and support.

"We are privileged to work with both the React19 and CrossTx teams to facilitate and implement this incredibly important COVID-19 vaccine injured referral platform," said Megan Redshaw, JD serving as project management for the initiative representing TrialSite. Redshaw, an attorney stated, "We estimate that the number of Americans injured by COVID-19 vaccination program ranges from a few hundred thousand to over two million people. While COVID-19 vaccine injuries are deemed statistically rare by agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, TrialSite estimates injury rates at 0.005 to 0.008 of the over 270 million Americans who received their full series vaccination. Unfortunately, this estimate suggests anywhere from approximately 1 to 2.16 million persons struggling with some level of COVID-19 vaccine-related injury, a large vulnerable group that's in desperate need of care."

"We are thrilled to partner with React19 and TrialSite to deliver this much-needed referral platform for individuals impacted by the COVID-19 vaccine," said Chad Nybo, Founder and CEO of CrossTx. "By combining our expertise in healthcare technology and closed-loop referral management with React19's deep knowledge of the COVID-19 care and patient landscape, CrossTx will support React19 both scale up and accelerate the coordination and connection of COVID-19 vaccine injured patients with the appropriate care."

"Spending the last year-and-a-half building our network dedicated to the quality and expeditious care of COVID-19 vaccine injured, we are now truly excited to work with CrossTx in this ongoing effort both to deliver, scale out and optimize our COVID-19 vaccine injury patient network," said Brianne Dressen, Co-founder of React19. Dressen herself was vaccine injured during a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial. She, along with co-founder Dr. Joel Wallskog, also COVID-19 vaccine injured, launched React19 with a bold vision to help as many people as possible. She emphasized, "We work diligently to provide COVID-19 vaccine injured individuals with the resources and support they need to navigate the challenges they may face with a vaccine injury. We believe that by collaborating with CrossTx and TrialSite we can make a real difference in the lives of those impacted by COVID-19 vaccines."

React19, CrossTx and TrialSite will continue to collaborate to ensure that the React19 COVID-19 vaccine injured referral network outcomes benefit as many people as possible across the United States with plans of expansion to other nations. Already React19 has members in dozens of countries across the world.

If you believe that you have been injured by the COVID-19 vaccine, please visit https://react19.org/start-here and reach out to React19.

If you are a provider or attorney seeking resources for your clients please visit: https://react19.org/physician-network-doctors

About React19

Founded almost two years ago, React19, a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting individuals impacted by COVID-19 vaccines, has grown to nearly 50,000 members. Through its network of medical professionals, advocates and navigators and other community resources across the United States and abroad in dozens of countries, React19 provides a comprehensive range of support services to individuals and families adversely impacted by the COVID-19 vaccination program. React19 has emerged as a vital support source for tens of thousands of vulnerable people seeking access to health care, at a time when most healthcare systems were not in a position to help.

About CrossTx Inc.

Based in Bozeman, Montana, CrossTx, a healthcare technology company, offers market-leading solutions delivered via its closed loop, care coordination and referral management platform deployed via AWS for Health cloud. Over 100 healthcare institutions use CrossTx for referral management, care coordination and compliance with U.S. Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Chronic Care Management fee-for-value solutions such as Chronic Care Management, Principal Care Management, Behavioral Health Integration, Transitional Care Management and Remote Physiological Monitoring. The CrossTx platform supports bi-directional HIPAA compliant referrals, complex intake processes, tracking healthcare data for actionable decision-making and CMS programs. With a focus on innovation and user-centered design, CrossTx develops solutions that make healthcare more efficient, accessible, and effective.

About TrialSite Inc.

Salt Lake City, Utah-headquartered TrialSite Inc. launched the media platform in 2019 as part of a quest to provide more transparency and engagement in the dynamic world of biomedical research. Representing a novel disruptive, empowering influence in the world of biomedical research, TrialSite translates complex medical-scientific results into comprehensible, consumable content. By tracking the scientific, regulatory and business aspects of biomedical-focused trial site organizations with an unbiased objective focus, TrialSite helps audiences worldwide better understand the world of biomedical research. With iOS and Android apps and subscription services, groups dedicated to therapeutic topics and a YouTube channel, independent TrialSite chronicles biomedical breakthroughs, challenges, best practices, intrigue and mishaps associated with biomedical and health-related research, including the daily tracking of clinical trials.

React19 Shows Up in Force at NASEM Comment Call—On the Move Establishing Digital Referral Network

React19 Shows Up in Force at NASEM Comment Call—On the Move Establishing Digital Referral Network

TrialSite recently reported that the U.S. Health and Human Services requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) review…

www.trialsitenews.com

TrialSite recently reported that the U.S. Health and Human Services requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) review relevant literature regarding adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines and shoulder injury related to vaccine administration. Last week NASEM held a virtual conference call for public comment. The stakes are big for the COVID-19 vaccine-injured community. TrialSite suggested that this announcement further evidences the mainstream’s rapid acknowledgment of pervasive COVID-19 vaccine-related injuries. All medicinal products have some risk, and even in scenarios where a serious adverse rate equals 0.005 of all full series doses, given the unprecedented magnitude and scale of the mass COVID-19 vaccination program the term “rare” injury becomes a relative one. But this latest action indicates the federal government via the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) could be gearing up to make adjustments to facilitate care for COVID-19 vaccine injured. Or conversely, the government may be conducting a process to shut down the entire discussion. Hopefully, the outcome supports the former rather than the latter scenario. COVID-19 vaccine injured group React19 showed up to the NASEM public comment meeting in force. Generally, the situation appears dire for this vulnerable, at-risk cohort.

NASEM participation

As mentioned above, React19 members participated in the NASEM public comment meeting. Commissioned by HSRA (part of HHS) to evaluate the available science to determine the causal relationship of injury to the Covid vaccines, React19 founder Brianne Dressen expressed some concerns to TrialSite. The patient advocates commend the federal government for taking this step, however, the group reports a handful of material issues moving forward that are of concern.

The independent testimonies given this week by the vaccine injured are only 3 minutes long. Individuals such as Shaun Barcavage NP, Edoardo Galli, and Renee expressed some of the concerns of the injured. See the YouTube link.

Most vaccine-injured need more information

For example, React19 reports outcomes from its latest poll of the Covid vaccine-injured: only 32% have applied for the current federal emergency vaccine injury fund known as the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).

In fact, according to the patient advocacy nonprofit’s poll, 27% of members don't know what the program is. Of the 41% who have not applied, most did not have a proper diagnosis in time to file or were told by lawyers to wait until the VICP program is available.

The current rejection rate of the CICP program is 96%! React19 reports, “This is clear evidence of the failure of the program in providing the necessary safety net for those who did the right things.”

React19 on the move

In addition to making the investments to streamline and optimize an advanced, digital referral network supporting COVID-19 vaccine injured, React19 is proactively meeting with various national political representatives from both major political parties.

Ms. Dressen reports that “a growing number of elected representatives from both the Republican and the Democratic Party are taking our meeting and expressing sincere concern about the serious adverse events associated with the vaccines."

Major challenges lie ahead however for the vulnerable group. The science needed to establish a causal link between many of the case series studies and the COVID-19 vaccine injured may take several years to establish.

The patient advocacy group seeks progress on multiple fronts including the request for special provisions be included for the Covid vaccines. As part of the HHS (HRSA) and NASEM review process, React19 puts forth:

Include published case series and reports (currently not completed.) (link of current literature is found here: covid.crosstx.com)

The absence of data should not be an automatic disqualifier. (currently, if there is no science available, the case is automatically rejected).

Consider physician's and expert testimony for the review of these cases (similar to a current malpractice suit filed in the US)

Consider historical evidence from previous vaccines, especially with neurological syndromes that will take years to associate with the Covid vaccines but have been identified as a known risk with previous vaccines (i.e., GBS, autoimmunity, CIDP, transverse myelitis, seizures)

Request NASEM committee add the following syndromes to their review, as these are common injuries that they are not currently evaluating:

MIS (multi-system inflammatory syndrome)

POTS (Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome)

SFN (Small fiber neuropathy)

Other items on the agenda include:

They hope to include an independent review of each case/or court similar to the VICP setup while allowing patients to have legal representation to help navigate the complex and cumbersome process, given the COVID-19 vaccine injured patient must “prove” their injury.

Conflict of interest concerns

React19 expressed concerns about the HHS/NASEM process in regard to the potential conflict of interest and a serious lack of patient voice present for the process. React19 now lobbies multiple elected representatives to at least consider this concern, proposing that an additional position be commissioned for a patient representative.

The key would be to balance any special interest money from industry that could influence the process. Also, the patient advocacy group proposes that given the death of scientific investigation into COVID-19 vaccine injuries NASEM requests the federal government perform proper epidemiological studies before the committee review is complete. The data does exist in existing medical systems (as React19 reportedly found in POTS patients in California), but it does take money and time to put the information together in an unbiased manner.

Referral network with COVID-19 vaccine injury study repository

Recently, React19, TrialSite and Bozeman, Montana-based electronic referral management and care coordination cloud-based software platform company CrossTx announced an electronic referral platform for COVID-19 vaccine injured. In an important announcement, React19 now matches the COVID-19 vaccine injured with general practitioners and specialists from across the United States and ultimately, worldwide in a sophisticated, secure system supporting all key compliance requirements (e.g., HIPAA, etc.).

Included in this system is the world’s largest electronic repository of COVID-19 vaccine adverse event studies, primarily case series (over 3,000) worldwide. TrialSite’s founder Daniel O’Connor had a critical message to the U.S. Health and Human Services, declaring:

“Frankly, the recently announced initiative driven by React19 in partnership with CrossTx and TrialSite should have been driven by the federal government with the support of academia, health sector and industry given its oversight and directives during the pandemic.” Instead, O’Connor continued, “A combination of non-profit, a cloud-based software company and the TrialSite media and social network platform had to invest to advance supportive infrastructure for COVID-19 vaccine injured.”

O’Connor emphasized, “React19’s mission to support this highly vulnerable cohort of patients, often with no care options and no insurance coverage means that this organization is the only safety net for tens of thousands of people, if not more.”

Based on TrialSite’s ongoing analysis of various vaccine safety reporting systems from around the world, as well as studies and discussions with experts the Salt Lake City-based media estimates the COVID-19 vaccine injured rate at 0.002 to 0.008 of the total fully immunized population, totaling anywhere from over half-a-million to over 2 million vaccine injured persons in the United States alone.

Some COVID-19 vaccine injured supporters suggest this number is significantly higher, while obtaining estimates from the federal government represents a difficult undertaking but is likely a lower number yet without any formal systematic investigational backing.

Now we are there: Almost only vaxxinated age > 65 go to hospital :: https://www.covid19.admin.ch/d…accineBreakthroughRel=abs

The ratio is about 100:3 vaxx::unvaxx The ratio of vaxx is about 88% for age > 65.

The grey color unknown is for any number of vaxx. Has been introduced to obfuscate the vaxxine delivery company...

Wuhan even chronicals :: https://usrtk.org/covid-19-ori…mal-origin-of-sars-cov-2/

How Fauci and friends obfuscated the Lab origin despite all involved exactly knew it must be lab origin...

Two of my very good friends in Italy - very careful in their behaviour and multiply vaccinated - have gone down with Covid. Recovering now - the male half of the couple was pretty sick - but his wife had a dizzy spell and fell downstairs and smashed her ankle. So she is now laid up for at least a month, possibly more.

The gift that keeps on giving!

Are COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Leading to Immune Tolerance? An Eclectic Group of Scientists Believes So

Are COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Leading to Immune Tolerance? An Eclectic Group of Scientists Believes So

A group of scientists affiliated with University of South Florida, King Abdulaziz University (Saudi Arabia), Cross Cancer Institute (Canada) and the University…

www.trialsitenews.com

A group of scientists affiliated with University of South Florida, King Abdulaziz University (Saudi Arabia), Cross Cancer Institute (Canada) and the University of Guadalajara in Mexico recently uploaded to the preprint server a provocative hypothesis for further investigation concerning COVID-19 vaccination. Acknowledging that the COVID-19 vaccines have helped prevent hospitalization and more severe forms of the disease, with 69.7% of the total population now immunized by these products, the authors suggest that mounting research points to the real possibility that the mRNA vaccine may induce immune tolerance, along with that caused by SARS-CoV-2 itself could potentially complicate the clinical course of COVID-19 infection. A troubling hypothesis, considering that immune tolerance (Immunological tolerance) represents a state of unresponsiveness of the immune system to substances or tissues that would otherwise have the capacity to trigger an immune response in a given organism.

A disturbing premise based on some other research, could repeated exposure to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines be leading to more illness? While the mainstream will undoubtedly ignore this yet to be peer reviewed work, science does need to pursue implications of the mass vaccination response to COVID-19, including inquiries into this topic.

What are some details?

The eclectic team of investigators point to recent research indicating high IgG4 levels in persons who have received two or more mRNA vaccine doses. But what’s the significance of heightened IgG4 levels?

According to these authors, at least some experts posit that greater IgG4 levels represent a protective role by “preventing immune over-activation, similar to that occurring during successful allergen-specific immunotherapy by inhibiting IgE-induced effects.”

What’s the hypothesis?

Pointing to emerging evidence, the authors report that greater IgG4 levels measured after repeated exposure to mRNA vaccines “is not a protective mechanism; rather, it may be part of the immune tolerance mechanisms to the spike protein that could promote unopposed SARS-CoV-2 infection and replication by suppressing natural antiviral responses.”

Frightening reality if true

While this recent study is not peer reviewed (and thus shouldn’t be cited as medical evidence), the output does have a basis for further investigation, based on cited examples in this study. With 13.32 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses of diverse platforms administered to date, the total number of fully mRNA vaccinated individuals in America alone equals well over 200 million people. In the USA, 613 million doses in total have been administered.

What is the hypothesis that repeated exposure to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is leading to immune tolerance? Could this be at least one explanation for why Omicron has become so virulent? What about the excess death rates covered by this and other independent media, yet not touched by the mainstream press? What about the hypothesis that IgG4-induced suppression of the immune system associated with multiple mRNA doses could lead to higher incidence of autoimmune diseases while also potentially promoting cancer growth or even autoimmune myocarditis in susceptible persons?

While this recent paper hasn’t been peer reviewed nor will it likely get much mainstream exposure, for that very reason this media suggests other scientists review the evidence and the arguments carefully.

IgG4 Antibodies Induced by mRNA Vaccines Generate Immune Tolerance to SARS-CoV-2’spike Protein by Suppressing the Immune System

Due to the health crisis caused by SARS-CoV-2, the creation of a new vaccine platform based on mRNA was implemented. Globally, around 13.32 billion COVID-19…

www.preprints.org

Bombshell Meta-Analyses—COVID-19 Vaccines Becoming More Dangerous than Beneficial

Bombshell Meta-Analyses—COVID-19 Vaccines Becoming More Dangerous than Beneficial

Recently Peter C. Gøtzsche, a prominent Danish physician, researcher and former leader of the Nordic Cochrane Center along with biomedical journalist…

www.trialsitenews.com

Recently Peter C. Gøtzsche, a prominent Danish physician, researcher and former leader of the Nordic Cochrane Center along with biomedical journalist Maryanne Demasi carried out a systematic review of systematic reviews and observational studies targeting serious adverse events (SAEs) associated with COVID-19 vaccination. Currently uploaded to the preprint server medRxiv, the duo reports their study included 18 systematic reviews, 14 randomized trials plus 34 other studies with a control group. Importantly they write a majority of the studies were of poor quality. Noteworthy, the duo found significantly greater serious adverse events (SAEs) of special interest with vaccines compared to placebo in relation to a systematic review of regulatory data on the two pivotal trials of the mRNA vaccines. The authors of this yet to be peer reviewed paper report that the excess risk was considerably larger than the benefit—the risk of hospitalization. Importantly the adenovirus vector vaccines heightened risks associated with venous thrombosis and thrombocytopenia, while the mRNA vaccines were linked to greater risk fro myocarditis, with a mortality of about 1-2 per 200 cases. The findings of this meta-analyses undertaking are truly troubling. While not peer reviewed yet, researchers should review carefully.

Unfortunately, the findings are not good, but not a surprise either given the number of vaccine-related injuries TrialSite has tracked over the last couple years. In this systematic review the authors report “serious neurological harms associated with the COVID-19 vaccines including:

Bell’s Palsy

Guillain-Barré syndrome

Myasthenic disorder

Stroke

All are likely induced by autoimmune reactions that the authors suspect associate with the COVID-19 vaccines. Of further concern the authors point out based on their findings:

“harms, i.e., those that prevent daily activities, were underreported in the randomized trials.” Making matters worse both Gøtzsche and Demasi found more severe harms were “common in studies of booster doses after a full vaccination” as well as logged in a previous study involving previously infected persons.

Funding

This study was independently funded by the Institute for Scientific Freedom and a private funder requesting anonymity, a retired filmmaker with no conflicts of interests in relation to our review.

Limitations

The authors report a couple limitations: Use of the vaccines in various age groups was not the same throughout Europe and that half of the observation period was after EMA had raised concern about possible blood clots caused by the adenovirus vector vaccines.

This study output hasn’t been peer reviewed and should not be cited as medical evidence.

New COVID-19 Vax Injury Hotline Overwhelms Bavaria Ministry of Health---Only Respond to a Third of All Calls

New COVID-19 Vax Injury Hotline Overwhelms Bavaria Ministry of Health---Only Respond to a Third of All Calls

A recent report from the Bavarian State Office for Health and Food Safety (LGL) reports a complete system overload involving COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse…

www.trialsitenews.com

A recent report from the Bavarian State Office for Health and Food Safety (LGL) reports a complete system overload involving COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse event and related injury damage hotline. The new hotline was set up to support COVID-19 vaccine injury calls in the state of Bavaria, but from the start became overloaded with calls. In fact, according to a spokeswoman for the Bavarian Ministry of Health, the new hotline was only able to process a third of the COVID-19 vaccine injured calls. The Post-Vax hotline was a big hit in Bavaria—so much so that the agency must find more staff to deal with the call volume involving the COVID-19 vaccine injured.

This disclosure was shared with the Ausburger Allgemeine, a major German daily news organization active since 1945.

According to the recent report the health authorities in this southern German state couldn’t have anticipated the number of calls, totaling 280 on the first day of the hotline service. The spokesperson for the state’s health agency told the local German news that at most, they were staffed to take on 100 COVID-19 vacine injured calls on the first day. Now the agency must scramble to be able to accommodate the total number of calls.

What’s the nature of the calls?

All sorts of calls are coming in, but according to the office of the Bavarian Ministry of Health many of the calls involved citizens suffering from a long history of illness, some with pronounced symptoms and severe conditions.

The news was also reported in Deutschlandfunk.

Bayern - Völlige Überlastung von Hotline für Corona-Impfschäden zum Auftakt

Die neue Hotline für Corona-Impfschäden in Bayern war zum Start offenbar völlig überlastet. Das Bayerische Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit…

www.deutschlandfunk.de

Quote from Alan Smith

very careful in their behaviour and multiply vaccinated

following. the. Fauci. 'science"?

Here's some. science Fauci. chose not to know,,

the highest paid. US. government official

following the money..not the immunology

TM54,13

.. the human body becomes a spike factory for."autoantigens"

A Speech I’d like to see delivered by a physician member of Congress

There are 18 physicians in congress, three Democrats in the house. As well as 11 Republicans in the house and four of the GOP in the Senate. One would think they would understand the science of what has unfolded during the pandemic. I have authored four previous times here at TrialSite News about what I suspect may be fraud associated with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored ACTIV-6 trial as well as other large randomized ivermectin trials, TOGETHER and COVID-OUT which used about the same dose and comparable tactics to make ivermectin falsely appear to be ineffective. Now, I’ve uncovered new information.

TOGETHER, COVID-OUT and ACTIV-6 were published in some of our highest impact journals, the New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA Network. Both journals ignored the obvious anomalies, inconsistencies and potential fraud and rather, involved what I consider ridiculous editorials proclaiming ivermectin was ineffective.

I have sent my work to many lawmakers and even wrote a speech for them which I would like to see delivered.

CONGRESSIONAL PHYSICIAN ACTIV-6 IVERMECTIN SPEECH

As you know I wasn’t always a politician. I was a practicing physician for many years and still do some work in impoverished areas. Recently it was brought to my attention that there were serious problems in a government sponsored COVID study. I've been reviewing the NIH sponsored, Duke University run, ACTIV-6 trial of ivermectin vs. placebo in patients with mild to moderate COVID, published in JAMA Network 10/21/22.

In the trial, those randomized to ivermectin on average received about 37% of the cumulative dose recommended by the world's most prominent ivermectin advocates, the FLCCC Alliance.

The second author of ACTIV-6 ivermectin, Dr. David Boulware said that the FLCCC said ACTIV-6’s dosing was "totally reasonable”. I question that statement.

Ivermectin is, among other things, an antiviral, a COVID protease inhibitor, which needs to be given as early as possible. Patients received the study drug in the mail at an average of 6 days into symptoms. 75% of the patients would not have qualified for paxlovid. 25% of the patients received the medicine at 8 days or later. 109 patients were already completely better when they got the medicine!

30% of the patients had little to no chance of showing benefit because of receiving the medicine extremely late or existing in an asymptomatic state when they did receive the medicine; they should have been excluded but weren’t.

Had they been excluded, in this author’s opinion ivermectin would have warranted an emergency use authorization. By undertreating those randomized to ivermectin, ACTIV-6 put those patients at unnecessary risk.

In the study Ivermectin still evidenced a statistical benefit at 7 and 14 days but to make it appear ineffective, ACTIV-6 changed the primary endpoint during the trial, which raises questions of ethics, from 14 days to a ridiculous 28 days when almost everyone is better. It still had a hazard ratio of 1.07 which is beneficial but Ivermectin only had a 91% chance of being beneficial as opposed to ACTIV-6’s criteria that it must have a 95% chance of being beneficial.

The US had about 60% alpha and 40% delta when ACTIV-6 first enrolled patients on 6/23/21. Three months later we had 99% delta. omicron came along in December. 2021 and quickly dominated.

The ACTIV-6 article in JAMA Network didn't even mention that different variants were treated, let alone that ivermectin had different effects on each. Only in the supplemental data was there a mention of an omicron surge starting December 15, 2021, during which 2000 patients were enrolled in the three arms of the trial from 12/15/21 to 2/4/22. 667 patients would have been predicted for ivermectin. There were 1591 patients in the trial, meaning 924 prior to the omicron surge.

Ivermectin was almost completely ineffective against omicron in the initial trial as proven in the subsequent ACTIV-6 600 trial with almost all omicron patients. A higher dose given for longer and started earlier showed almost no benefit. Given that ivermectin was borderline overall according to ACTIV-6 and it had almost no benefit for omicron, about 40% of the patients, which means ivermectin had to have shown significant benefit prior to omicron.

ACTIV-6 was supposed to do interim data analyses every 300 patients but said they were overwhelmed with patients and failed to follow that part of the protocol. Over 900 patients had enrolled prior to the omicron surge and three analyses should have been done. The trial has been finished for over a year and the data never produced. I feel confident that ACTIV-6 knew the data at all times. It certainly looks like ACTIV-6 opted to hide the earlier data because it would have shown, at least according to my opinion, that ivermectin deserved an emergency use authorization. I am demanding that that data be produced. The American public paid for that data—remember public funding went into ACTIV-6.

ACTIV-6 was possibly among the most fraudulent medical trials in history. Could it be that the study’s only goal was to make ivermectin falsely appear to be ineffective? Of course, some would declare that statement outlandish, but based on everything I have witnessed and analyzed, I’m not so sure. Besides those who planned and executed this trial, others deserve blame. The WCG Institutional Review Board (IRB) was paid to make sure the study was done correctly and patient safety was maintained but allowed patients to be severely undertreated. They have overseen 733 COVID studies and could not have been fooled. The six voting members of the ACTIV-6 independent data monitoring committee, including two biostatisticians and two infectious disease doctors, managed to report nothing wrong. The biostatisticians who did the final statistical analyses need to be called to task.

About a hundred physicians in academic medicine were involved in the trial. How was it that no one noticed that anything was wrong or off? The trial was published five months ago and not a single physician in academic medicine has commented publicly on the obvious fraud in the trial. Where is the Infectious Disease Society of America? Many infectious disease doctors were involved in this trial. Some were told of the fraud recently and have yet to speak up. 30 members of the leadership of the American College of Physicians, 161,000 internists, were sent this information many times but they refuse to alert their members or the public.

The major media has done nothing but write “hit pieces’ on ivermectin knowing they are deceptive or outright fraudulent. Both the media and social media have censored positive information about ivermectin at the direction of our federal government and did no due diligence on the three obviously fraudulent large randomized ivermectin trials. No one will publish other than independent media such as TrialSite News that Uttar Pradesh, India, 241 million people now has 100 COVID cases a day thanks to ivermectin.

The other two large randomized ivermectin trials, TOGETHER and COVID-OUT used similar dosing and tactics to make ivermectin appear ineffective and were published in the New England Journal of Medicine which could not have missed everything. We will be investigating them as there appears to have been a coordinated effort to sabotage ivermectin.

I practiced medicine for a long time and like almost all physicians had profound faith in NIH, CDC, FDA, the major medical journals and the major medical organizations. We know now that there is no longer any reason for that faith.

We know that the federal government used $10 billion of taxpayer money to pay off as many medical organizations as possible to shut them up. Some physicians complied for the money, others to protect their grant money but most complied to protect their jobs. 80% of doctors work for some organization. Those organizations, including the vast majority of medical schools, health care organizations and hospitals decided to comply with the government plan of action and get rid of anyone who did not go along with the program.

Those who suffered most from these actions were the American people who were denied cheap, safe, effective generic drugs for COVID which were available early in the pandemic. They are now limited to paxlovid and molnupiravir which only became available after two years of the pandemic, are hideously expensive and have very limited indications. Early treatment of COVID with existing medications would have cut the pandemic down 75%. Failure to do so is the main reason for inflation and the economic downturn.

If there was any doubt about our ability to trust our federal healthcare agencies and academic medicine, just look at ACTIV-6 ivermectin in which academic medicine colluded with the government to produce fake data to make an effective COVID drug appear ineffective and protect drug company profits. None of this could have happened without the active participation of the leaders of our federal government and academic medicine. Nearly all of academic medicine and every major medical institution colluded with the government or looked the other way during COVID. Money is the only thing that really matters to medical institutions.

At this time academic medicine including the major medical journals appears mostly controlled by our government and drug companies. California went so far as to pass a law that doctors can only tell patients what democratically controlled federal healthcare agencies claim the truth is.

It deeply troubles me that my alma mater was involved in these trials. Even worse, I now know that many in leadership were told about the fraud long ago and failed to come forward with the truth. The government and drug companies have no business running medicine. They cannot be trusted. The entire system needs to be trashed and we need to start over with new, honest, independent people running our federal healthcare agencies. The federal government has no business interfering with doctors’ management of patients in order to satisfy their political agenda.

Our analysis of the trial will be posted on the websites of as many state health department sites as we can get. We hope every state health department will post it. I hope that all members of congress will study what happened, condemn it and bring those responsible to justice.

I hope that every physician will read these documents carefully. Physicians need to realize they were duped by the government and their own medical leadership, especially those in infectious diseases, into providing inferior care to COVID patients. Their actions established policies for the rest of the world. I can assure you that I will do my best to stop the state medical boards who have been harassing doctors for doing their best to help patients by ordering ivermectin.

I have spoken to congressperson, Dr. Brad Wenstrup, who chairs the house select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic which includes six physicians, four Republican and two Democrats. They understand exactly what happened. They will be investigating those responsible for this crime against humanity and will hold them accountable.

Authors Conclude "Relatively Safe" as Dozens of Children Die after COVID-19 Vaccination

Published Reports Whitewashing Fatal Complications

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH™

Apr 5

Authors Conclude "Relatively Safe" as Dozens of Children Die after COVID-19 Vaccination

Published Reports Whitewashing Fatal Complications

petermcculloughmd.substack.com

As an author and editor, I have always lived by a principle of medical publication that the conclusions must be supported by the data presented. Many have asked me why to do doctors still support COVID-19 vaccination with all safety data systems reporting record mortality after injection—many cases occurring on the same day or in the next few days after administration? The reason may be what doctors are concluding from the data in peer-reviewed manuscripts does not match the information disclosed.

Villa-Zapata and coworkers published a report from VAERS on “safety” of COVID-19 vaccination in children age 5 to 17 and in the data table there are 56 deaths! Also listed are other potentially fatal complications such as anaphylaxis and myocarditis. The authors concluded that COVID-19 vaccination in children is “relatively safe.”

Quote from Fm1

Are COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Leading to Immune Tolerance? A

This has been proven already 1.5 years ago. The spike antibodies masks (make it blind) the ACE-2 receptor. But ACE-2 is needed for the interferon response = virus defense. So your body cannot deal with a viral infection.

So basically after this criminal RNA cure you are immune suppressive. This effect get enhanced if you are re-exposed to SARS-COV-2. Here we see a perfect correlation with excess mortality and virus circulation among age > 65.

This is part of ADE effect. Countless people get pertussis extra damaging Omicron etc...As posted above 3x (rate corrected) more vaxx than unvaxx go to hospital .

UK data already last year did show that Vaxx only get 10x more often Covid....

Clear Winner from Operation Warp Speed Goes Unrecognized by Public Health Officials and was Denied to Patients

Antiviral Monoclonal Antibodies Safe and Effective in Acute COVID-19

Antiviral Monoclonal Antibodies Safe and Effective in Acute COVID-19

Clear Winner from Operation Warp Speed Goes Unrecognized by Public Health Officials and was Denied to Patients

petermcculloughmd.substack.com

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

I would have never thought five years ago that I would be using advanced monoclonal antibodies to treat acute viremia in a potentially fatal illness to help a patient avoid hospitalization or death. Yet, early research done by Dr. Ralph Baric who conceived SARS-CoV-2 in his 2015 papers also anticipated the development of a countermeasures such monoclonal antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2.

Operation Warp Speed is an impressive public-private partnership to rapidly develop and test countermeasures against COVID-19. It’s main products were vaccines, oral antivirals, and monoclonal antibodies. COVID-19 vaccines, continue to be a debacle with record injuries, disabilities, and death with no proven reductions in hospitalization or death from proper trials. Sadly, Paxlovid and Mulnupiravir were very slow to develop and were not gamechangers in the pandemic.

The clear winner from OWS was its very first acute ambulatory product, monoclonal antibodies. Kip et al used electronic medical records and comparative data for those treated and denied monoclonal antibodies for acute COVID-19. The risk for hospitalization or death at 28 days was 4.6% in 2571 treated patients and 7.6% in 5135 nontreated control patients (risk ratio [RR], 0.61 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74]). In subgroup analyses, those receiving monoclonal antibodies when the Alpha and Delta variants were presumed to be predominant had estimated RRs of 0.55 and 0.53, respectively, compared with 0.71 for the Omicron variant period. Relative risk estimates for individual products all suggested lower risk for hospitalization or death. Among immunocompromised patients, the RR was 0.45 (CI, 0.28 to 0.71).