This document is part of an archive of postings on Dissecting Leftism, a blog hosted by Blogspot who are in turn owned by Google. The index to the archive is available here or here. Indexes to my other blogs can be located here or here. Archives do accompany my original postings but, given the animus towards conservative writing on Google and other internet institutions, their permanence is uncertain. These alternative archives help ensure a more permanent record of what I have written.

This is a backup copy of the original blog

January 31, 2022

What This Scientist Said About Omicron Explains Everything…

Dr. Robert Malone a vaccine scientist known for his work on the mRNA vaccine believes there is some very good news emerging from the rapid spread of the COVID omicron variant, suggesting that God may have given the world a “Christmas present.”

Notably, Malone helped invent the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines.

Shortly before Christmas, Malone appeared on Fox News’s “The Ingraham Angle,” the doctor stated omicron may well do what vaccines have not been able to fully accomplish to date: provide strong immunity.

Here’s what Malone said, referring to the two-round initial shots and the booster:

“Omicron blows right through the vaccines and through the triple jab.”

“Now here’s the good news,” he continued. “The number of deaths from omicron worldwide is less than 10 [by] my last count.”

He then confirms that the vaccines and the mandates were only an illusion. It gets better, “Omicron blows right through the vaccines and through the triple jab.”

Malone contended:

“So the good news with omicron is very low disease, highly infectious. It looks an awful lot to the experienced vaccinologist like a live-attenuated virus vaccine that you might design for the purpose. It’s going to elicit a strong mucosal immune response.”

“This is about as good as we could possibly want right now in terms of outcomes.”

After a dramatic pause for effect, the doctor declared:

“Now, here’s the good news. The number of deaths from omicron worldwide is less than 10 to my last count.” In case you don’t get the significance, he adds, “if you believe in a God, this looks an awful lot like a Christmas present.”

Deep State Rabbithole has more of this report:

Delta and all the previous mutant versions dove deep into the patient’s lungs. That “can lead to serious illness.” This strain doesn’t, instead of shifting “to the upper airway, indicating that the virus is weakening.”

Since a vaccine is simply a man-made crippled copy of the virus to start with, omicron is a natural vaccine against itself. This variant is both a very low disease and highly infectious.

“It looks an awful lot to the experienced vaccinologist like a live-attenuated virus vaccine that you might design for purpose. This is about as good as we could possibly want right now in terms of outcomes.”

“The thing is with omicron, it has a reproductive coefficient — now that’s fancy medical epidemiology talk — but it has a reproductive coefficient with a measure of effectiveness that’s in the range of measles. It’s in the seven to 10 range.”

Monica Gandhi, an immunologist at the University of California, confirms that NO mandate is required:

“One infected person will on average spread it to seven to 10 more people. We’re all going to get infected. I hope this variant creates profound immunity in the population. It will hopefully end the pandemic.”


FDA is accused of trying to force Americans to get vaccinated after 'asinine' decision to limit use of COVID antibody treatments because 'they don't work against Omicron'

Critics are expressing fury after the Food and Drug Administration revised the emergency use authorizations for COVID-19 antibody treatments from Regeneron and Eli Lilly to limit their use, saying the drugs are unlikely to work against the Omicron coronavirus variant.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who opened treatment centers to distribute the antibody drugs, slammed the decision, saying the FDA had acted 'without shred of clinical data to support its decision.'

Following the FDA ruling on Monday, Florida said it had been forced to close all of its treatment centers and cancel thousands of appointments, and DeSantis lashed out at President Joe Biden over the decision.

'There are real-world implications to Biden's medical authoritarianism – Americans' access to treatments is now subject to the whims of a failing president,' DeSantis said in a statement.

The FDA noted in its decision on Monday that Omicron accounts for more than 99 percent of U.S. infections, making it 'highly unlikely' the antibodies would help people now seeking treatment.

The agency said restricting their use would also eliminate unnecessary drug side effects from ineffective treatment, including allergic reactions.

The two treatments are still effective against Delta, but the CDC now estimates that Delta accounts for just 0.5 percent of new cases in the country.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who opened treatment centers to distribute the antibody drugs, slammed President Joe Biden over the decision, calling it 'medical authoritarianism'

Some critics accused the FDA of trying to restrict treatment options to coerce people into getting vaccinated.

'This is all about the Biden and his admin taking away a treatment that helps to try to force people into getting the Vaccine,' one person tweeted.

'I just saw that the FDA has withdrawn emergency approval for the Regeneron and Eli Lilly monoclonal antibodies. What are they doing? Trying to kill us?' another wrote.

'Ok, so now the govt is actually saying we want people to die. There is still delta floating around. To take away [emergency use authorization] is asinine,' another wrote.

The FDA said Monday the two antibody treatments are currently not cleared for use in any U.S. states or territories, but may be authorized in certain regions if they work against potential new variants.

Doctors have alternate therapies to battle early COVID-19 cases, including two new antiviral pills from Pfizer and Merck, but both are in short supply.

An antibody drug from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) that remains effective also is in short supply.

Last month, the U.S. government had paused the distribution of Regeneron and Lilly's treatments and said the halt would continue until new data emerges on their efficacy against Omicron.

The two drugs are laboratory-made versions of virus-blocking antibodies. They are intended to head off severe disease and death by supplying concentrated doses of one or two antibodies early in an infection.

Then-President Donald Trump received Regeneron's antibody combination after he tested positive for the coronavirus in 2020.

GSK and Vir Biotech are boosting production of their alternative antibody drug, sotrovimab, to help meet soaring demand in the United States.

The FDA has also expanded its approval for the use of Gilead Sciences' antiviral COVID-19 drug remdesivir to treat non-hospitalized patients aged 12 years and above.

'The FDA is committed to continuing to review emerging data on all COVID-19 therapies related to the potential impact of variants and revise the authorizations further as appropriate to ensure healthcare providers have an effective arsenal of treatments for patients,' the agency said in a statement.

But the announcement, coming in a press release with no warning, drew criticism from officials in Florida as 'abrupt' and poorly supported.

'Rather than giving Americans the option for various COVID treatments, the FDA and the Biden Administration issued their royal decree, taking away the very thing that is proven to reduce hospitalizations and save lives,' said Florida Lieutenant Governor Jeanette Nuñez in a statement.

'Monoclonal antibody treatments like Regeneron have had a positive impact for thousands of Floridians,' she added.

'For the CDC and FDA, which have been consistently inconsistent throughout the entire pandemic, to restrict treatment does nothing but put individuals at risk.'

DeSantis has heavily promoted antibody drugs as a signature part of his administration's COVID-19 response, setting up infusion sites and lauding them at news conferences, while opposing vaccine mandates and other public health measures. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has also launched state-sponsored infusion sites.

The drugs are not a substitute for vaccination and are generally reserved for people who are the most vulnerable, including seniors, transplant recipients and those with conditions like heart disease and diabetes.

Since early January, the U.S. government has shipped enough doses of the two antibodies to treat more than 300,000 patients.

Both Regeneron and Lilly previously announced they were developing new antibodies that target omicron.

The move comes days after regulators broadened the use of remdesivir - the first drug approved for COVID-19 - to treat more patients.

On Friday, the FDA expanded the antiviral's approval to include adults and children with early COVID-19 who face a high risk of ending up in the hospital. Remdesivir previously had been limited to hospitalized patients.

An influential panel of federal experts had already recommended using the infused drug to try to head off hospitalization. The same guidelines from the National Institutes of Health panel recommend against continued use of Lilly and Regeneron's antibody drugs due to their reduced effectiveness against omicron.

Still, many hospitals will face challenges in ramping up remdesivir treatments.

The drug requires three consecutive IV infusions over three days, when used for non-hospitalized patients. That time-consuming process won't be an option for many over-capacity hospitals facing staff shortages.




January 30, 2022

Super immunity on the horizon

A former CSIRO scientist’s discovery of crossover immunity between an ancestor of Covid-19 and the virus that has plunged the world into a third year of chaos has given rise to a candidate vaccine that could work against all future variants. The pan-Covid jab is set to enter human trials within months.

Linfa Wang, the one-time “batman” of Australian science who traced the path of the deadly Hendra virus from flying foxes, to horses and then people, and who now heads the Singapore government’s Covid research program, calls it a “silver lining” to the death and suffering unleashed by the pandemic.

It was a shaft of hope in an otherwise grim week, as the nation wearily marked the second anniversary of the virus’s onslaught. Nearly 3500 Australians have died to date, with the known number of people infected approaching two million.

Professor Wang, 61, leveraged the experience and dogged determination he used to identify the origin of Hendra virus to get to the bottom of another mystery.

The horse vaccine he helped develop at the CSIRO’s then Australian Animal Health Laboratory in Geelong for the zoonotic disease had also worked on Hendra’s cousin, the Nipah virus.

So why didn’t the neutralising antibodies carried by SARS survivors block the related Covid coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2?

Puzzled, he persuaded the Singapore government to allow him to perform an experiment with people who had contracted SARS during the 2002-04 outbreak. That virus killed 10 per cent of those infected – a much higher fatality rate than Covid-19 – but was sharply less contagious than Covid-19, striking only 8000 people mainly in Southeast Asia.

Professor Wang tested the blood of eight SARS survivors who had received the Pfizer vaccine against a panel of coronaviruses from the sarbecovirus subgroup that gave rise to Covid-19. This included the original Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2, its Beta and Delta variants, as well as five bat and pangolin sarbecoviruses.

To his astonishment, the results came back with bells on them: the vaccine had stimulated some of the highest immunity levels he had ever seen to all the sarbecoviruses, including the Covid variants. No such potent and all-encompassing antibody response was detected in blood samples from fully vaccinated individuals not exposed to the original SARS virus, even those who had also contracted Covid-19.

“That really was what people define as a Eureka moment,” Professor Wang told The Weekend Australian. “When I saw the data I just thought, ‘this is too good to believe’.”

He asked an assisting scientist, only half in jest, whether the report had been photoshopped.

“We repeated it and when we got the same data, I said, ‘wow, that’s big’. Against the 10 viruses we did, they were all up there,” he continued, lifting a hand to eye level and chopping the air. “When you give a SARS survivor two doses of the (Covid) vaccine they get this super-immunity. Their neutralising antibodies blocked everything from … Beta, Delta and now Omicron.”

How? Professor Wang said the human immune system was set up to recognise and target specific parts of an invading virus. Omicron emerged with alarming mutations to the spike protein, the needle-like outcrops on the surface of the virus that bind with human cells, allowing the hyper-contagious new variant to evade existing vaccines in some circumstances as well as most monoclonal antibody treatments.

Overlaying the Covid vaccine on the acquired immunity of a SARS survivor supercharged the immune system, forcing it to “go back and go deeper”, he said.

“Basically, you have to trigger the human immune system to work harder by giving it two related viruses that are still substantially different.”

This “opened the door” to what Nobel prize-winning immunologist Peter Doherty calls a consensus vaccine between SARS-1 and SARS-CoV-2 to protect against any future variant Covid might throw out. “This is the silver lining, right, of people dying and the whole world suffering,” Professor Wang said.

Taking advantage of Australia’s reopened international border, he returned last week to Victoria, his home of 25 years, to confer with former colleagues and researchers at Professor Doherty’s eponymous research institute. “We are looking for collaboration. A pandemic is not a national thing, it is an international thing,” Professor Wang said.

The 81-year-old Nobel laureate said the cross-reactive process was something he had looked at, but had been unable to pursue due to technology restraints. “It is a very exciting development,” Professor Doherty said.

Professor Wang’s team at the Emerging Infectious Disease Program at the Duke University-National University of Singapore medical school was one of a number of international research groups in the running. But his had the advantage of ready access to samples from SARS survivors and breakthrough assaying technology that allowed them to test the bloodwork against multiple sarbecoviruses. Animal studies of the candidate vaccine had shown it provided cross-protection in mice and negotiations were advancing with a number of pharmaceutical companies, he said. A phase-1 human safety trial was pencilled in for the coming months.


The Scale of Death Caused by the Suppression of Treatments for Covid-19

The debate about early treatments for covid-19 has been continuing despite all attempts by the corporate media to quash any notion that treatments might work. Mountains of data have been distributed on the internet through alternative sources. This data reveals a shocking indication of the scale of death that has been caused by suppression and censorship.

We know about the wicked suppression of ivermectin. For two years (two years!) and counting our health authorities did nothing to investigate the repurposing of existing treatments for potential use against covid-19. However, some talented doctors around the world didn’t waste any time. From the start, they were looking for ways to treat their patients and began to share their professional observations with colleagues. Discussions between individual doctors led to the formation of the FLCCC (Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance).

In mid-October 2020, Professor Paul E. Marik noticed a data signal indicating that ivermectin could play an important role in the treatment of covid-19. Professor Marik then presented his findings to the FLCCC. At that stage, the other members of the FLCCC were somewhat skeptical - they thought that perhaps Professor Marik might be overstating the case. However, after looking at the data in more detail the FLCCC came around to the idea and one month after Professor Marik’s presentation the FLCCC officially got behind the use of ivermectin.

Professor Marik is board certified in Internal Medicine, Critical Care Medicine, Neurocritical Care and Nutrition Science. For more than a decade Dr. Marik was Professor of Medicine and Chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School (EVMS). A position that ended about a week ago due to an ongoing legal battle with Sentara Norfolk General Hospital, where Dr. Marik is also the director of the ICU.


What we know about the BA.2 Omicron variant

As newly reported cases of Covid-19 decline in parts of the U.S., researchers around the world are monitoring a new variant of the Omicron variant dubbed BA.2. The variant is under observation by countries including Denmark, India and the U.K., though little is still known about its properties and the threat it may pose.

Here’s what scientists and public-health experts know so far about the BA. 2 variant:

What is the BA. 2 variant of Covid-19?

The BA. 2 variant of Covid-19 is a relation of the widely-spreading original Omicron variant known as BA. 1, according to Theodora Hatziioannou, an associate professor of virology at Rockefeller University.

The two variants arose around the same time and come from the same immediate ancestor strain. They have many mutations in common but there are also around 20 mutations that are different between the two variants. The differences between this variant and BA. 1 can be seen in the spike protein of the virus, Dr. Hatziioannou said.

Viruses mutate all the time and diversification within a variant is normal. The earlier Delta variant comprised more than 200 sublineages before it was replaced by Omicron, according to Francois Balloux, director of the University College London Genetics Institute.

Is the BA. 2 variant in the U. S.? Yes. The BA. 2 variant has been detected in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which provides estimates of the prevalence of various Covid-19 strains. The CDC’s estimates show that Omicron was likely responsible for 99.9% of Covid-19 infections in the week ending Jan. 22. The CDC said the prevalence of some other variants including BA. 2 was included in the Omicron tally.

Where else in the world has the BA. 2 variant been detected?

At least 40 countries have detected the BA. 2 variant, including the U.K., Denmark, India, Sweden, Singapore and the Philippines. It isn’t possible at this point to determine where the sublineage originated, according to the U.K. Health Security Agency.

The BA. 2 variant may be displacing the BA. 1 in Denmark, said Dr. Hatziioannou. “They’re identifying more and more cases of BA. 2 rather than BA. 1,” she said.

Is BA. 2 a Covid-19 variant of concern?

No. The World Health Organization designated Omicron the fifth “variant of concern” in November based on the risks posed by changes in its makeup and behaviour compared with other versions of the virus, including its increased infectiousness. It hasn’t given BA. 2 any designation, but has urged researchers to closely track and study the variant. Earlier variants of concern included Delta, which drove a wave of cases in the U.S. and elsewhere last summer, and Beta, which like Omicron was first identified in South Africa.

Other variants have remained variants of interest, meaning they have genetic changes that affect the way the virus works, according to the WHO. Lambda and Mu are variants of interest that sickened people in some parts of the world, such as South America, but didn’t outcompete variants including Delta in the U.S. and elsewhere.

What are the symptoms for the BA. 2 variant? Is the BA. 2 variant more severe than the Omicron variant?

It isn’t clear whether the BA. 2 variant behaves in materially different ways than the Omicron variant, which research has shown to be far more infectious than previous strains but also less likely to lead to severe disease in many cases.

In Denmark, one of the countries with high rates of BA. 2, an initial analysis by the government-run State Serum Institute showed no differences in hospitalisation for BA. 2 compared with BA.1.

Though BA. 2 continues to spread in different countries, the CDC said the variant was responsible for a very small share of recent Covid-19 infections compared with other circulating viruses in the U.S. and around the world. “Currently there is no evidence that the BA. 2 lineage is more severe than the BA. 1 lineage. [The] CDC continues to monitor variants that are circulating both domestically and internationally,” said the agency.

How is the BA. 2 variant responding to treatment and vaccinations?

Though it is too early to tell, Dr. Hatziioannou predicts the BA. 2 variant will be as resistant to monoclonal antibodies as BA.1. She said there are only slight differences on the spike protein of BA. 2 compared with BA. 1, leading her to conclude that they are likely to behave similarly. The monoclonal antibody treatment made by GlaxoSmithKline PLC may be effective in treating this variant because it has been successful in treating BA.1. Pfizer Inc. and Merck & Co. antiviral pills for Covid-19 continue to work against the original Omicron variant and may have similar effects against BA.2.

Researchers predict that there won’t be a significant difference in how vaccines hold up against BA. 2, compared with the original Omicron. Most of the mutation differences between the two variants occur outside areas of the virus that are important for immune recognition. Studies are under way to confirm this.




January 28, 2022

Doctor’s offering early treatment of Covid have Treated Over 150,000 COVID-19 Patients With 99.99 Percent Survival

A doctor who has been offering free telehealth services to COVID-19 patients during the pandemic says that early treatment for COVID-19 works, claiming that he has a 99.99 percent survival rate.

“We have a team of volunteer free doctors that donate their time to help treat these patients that come to us,” Dr. Ben Marble, the founder of, an online medical consultation service, said at a roundtable discussion hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on Jan. 24.

He added, “We deliver the early treatment protocols to them as early as we can, and we have a 99.99 percent survival rate. So, I believe, the free volunteered doctors have settled the science on this—early treatment works, period!”

Marble was answering Johnson’s question about what people can do if they or their loved ones have COVID-19.

People can visit the website, create an account, and fill out a patient intake form if the doctors are accepting new patients for that day. One of the doctors will then reach out in less than 24 hours. With a huge demand for their services, the physicians say they can only “accept a certain number of patients each day.”

Marble says that he and his small team of volunteer doctors prescribe Dr. Peter McCullough’s treatment protocol, which consists of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, monoclonal antibodies, prednisone, and other low-cost generic drugs. They also prescribe vitamins D and C, and zinc.

McCullough, a cardiologist, and epidemiologist, along with several physicians put together an early treatment protocol to provide outpatient care for COVID-19 patients. Their paper was published in The American Journal of Medicine in August 2020.

Dr. Pierre Kory, a pulmonologist and the President at the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, says that the public is not aware that there are doctors across the country who will provide telehealth and early treatment for COVID-19.

“On our website, we have a button, which says find a provider. We’ve tried to collect as many telehealth providers that treat all states in the country,” Kory said.

“We are trying to let that message be known because that message is being suppressed that this disease is treatable,” he added.

Kory also claims that there is corruption at the federal level in suppressing early treatment with repurposed cheap drugs and their availability and that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been “captured by the pharmaceutical industry.”

“The corruption is because they don’t want you to use off-label, repurposed generic medicines. It does not provide profit to the system,” Kory said, adding that, “you know what’s going on in this country right now, is that the CDC has been captured by the pharmaceutical industry.”

“They sent out a memo in August of 2021, they sent out a similar memo back in the spring 2020, telling the nation’s physicians and pharmacists not to use generic medicines.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to the CDC for comment.

Early treatments were and continue to be discouraged by the CDC, whose guidance since the beginning of the pandemic up until January 2022, only focused on people self-quarantining for 14 days, keeping hydrated, taking analgesics, and only seeking hospital care when they can’t breathe or turn blue. They also warned people to not take any medications not approved for COVID-19.

“People have been seriously harmed and even died after taking products not approved for use to treat or prevent COVID-19, even products approved or prescribed for other uses,” the CDC wrote on its potential treatments webpage.

The weblink provided for the alleged harmful product was related to a March 2020 health alert warning of a serious health effect from ingesting non-pharmaceutical chloroquine phosphate used to clean fish tanks. This alert came after an Arizona man and his wife took the non-pharmaceutical drug in an attempt to self-medicate for COVID-19.

For the past two years, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has only authorized limited early outpatient treatments for COVID-19 that include monoclonal antibodies for high-risk patients and antiviral pills from Merck and Pfizer. However, the FDA on Jan. 24 announced it was limiting the use of Eli Lilly and Regeneron monoclonal antibodies only to patients “likely to have been infected with or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments.”

Johnson held the roundtable discussion to offer a different perspective on the response to the pandemic, including on “the current state of knowledge of early and hospital treatment, vaccine efficacy and safety, what went right, what went wrong, what should be done now, and what needs to be addressed long term.”

The discussion panel consisted of health experts and scientists that included McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone, and Dr. Paul Marik.

According to a press release, Johnson also invited over a dozen prominent figures involved in developing, promoting, and leading the pandemic response, including the CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky and White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Jeffrey Zients. All of the individuals declined to attend the forum.


COVID-19 oral antivirals have been embraced in much of the US and could be a pandemic game changer

Jeff Carlson is a keen cyclist who has kept active throughout the pandemic, and is double-vaccinated and boosted.

But as he lay on his couch struggling for breath, he felt worse than he could ever remember feeling in his life.

Within a day or two of experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, the 61-year-old from Minnesota was "going downhill" fast. "I was laying on my couch. A lot of my body functions were slowing," he said.

His blood oxygen levels, which he measures regularly because of underlying health conditions, dropped dangerously low. In his condition, he could have been sent straight to hospital.

But his telehealth team offered him what he now describes as a "miracle drug": a course of one of the newly authorised oral antivirals for COVID-19.

A friend picked the pills up at the pharmacy for him. Mr Carlson said less than 24 hours later, things were turning around.

A week later he could barely believe he had been sick at all. "I'm back out exercising … and I don't have any side effects," he said.

Mr Carlson was among the very first Americans to be prescribed oral antivirals for COVID-19.

In December, the US Food and Drug Administration authorised Pfizer's Paxlovid and Merck's molnupiravir for the treatment of mild to moderate cases of COVID-19.

The drugs are taken twice a day for five days with the aim of preventing hospitalisations.

"I believe it saved my life," Mr Carlson said. "And if it didn't save my life, it saved me from taking up another bed in the hospital."

Vaccines are still considered the best defence against serious disease. The pills are intended for patients who are not yet hospitalised but are at risk of being admitted or of dying.

Until now, COVID-19 treatments, including monoclonal antibodies and the antiviral remdesivir, have largely only been available in hospitals because they are administered intravenously.

The arrival of the take-at-home COVID treatments has been eagerly awaited. "It's a game changer that allows us to get back to some kind of normal life where we can treat patients effectively and easily," Bryan Jarabek, from M Health Fairview in Minnesota — Mr Carlson's healthcare provider — said.

Dr Jarabek said he and his team were thrilled by Mr Carlson's speedy recovery. "We all celebrated a tonne," Dr Jarabek said.

M Health Fairview is just beginning to roll out the new medicines and is experiencing the kinds of issues that will challenge providers the world over.

The first issue with antivirals is supply. Mass production of the drugs is time consuming, so for the moment stock is "extremely limited", according to Dr Jarabek.

There is also a small time frame in which the drugs can be prescribed. The drugs interfere with the virus's ability to multiply so a patient must take them within five days of becoming ill.

That means that in a very short space of time the patient has to be tested for COVID-19, get the result, consult with their medical team, locate a pharmacy that has the drug and start taking it.

The third issue is that although Paxlovid has a far higher success rate in preventing hospitalisations in trials — 90 per cent compared to 30 per cent for molnupiravir — it has potentially dangerous interactions with other drugs.

For Mr Carlson, who was already on medications for diabetes and coronary heart disease, Paxlovid just was not an option.

He was lucky that in his case, molnupiravir worked. "I was told this drug that I took had a 30 per cent effective rate," he said. "In my case, it was 100 per cent."

Katherine Yang, a clinical professor of pharmacy at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), said the danger of drug interactions associated with Paxlovid were "a little bit of a Catch 22".

The very patients who could benefit most from the COVID pills are the very ones who shouldn't take it.

Dr Yang said the arrival of the first generation of COVID-19 pills was nevertheless "exciting and the next step".

"I don't know if it's the magic bullet," she said. "It's the most magic bullet we have so far."


Proposed State Law Would Make It Illegal to Request a Person’s Vaccine Status

A newly proposed South Carolina law would make it illegal for certain institutions to ask a person for their COVID-19 vaccination status.

“The government has no place in making you or telling you to take the vaccination or threatening your livelihood if you don’t,” said state Rep. William Chumley, a co-sponsor of the bill, known as H.4848.

A representative of a public, private, or nonprofit entity who asks about a person’s COVID-19 vaccination status should be fined more than $14,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, according to the text of the bill.

“South Carolina didn’t want to get in this fight,” Chumley told local media outlets. “It was brought to us by the federal government.”

The bill is currently being discussed in a state House committee.

Lawmakers who sponsored the bill said they support the measure because it can serve as a bulwark against government coercion.

“It’s about protecting people from being forced or coerced into getting a vaccine for purposes of employment, admission to schools, or government services,” state Rep. Wayne Long, a Republican, told Channel 2 News.

“I get calls from people literally every week begging the legislature to take some kind of action to protect people’s rights, to protect their privacy, and to keep them from being forced or coerced into getting a vaccine that they frankly don’t want to get,” Long added. “And even for people who have gotten the vaccine, I’ve spoken with many of them, it’s really a privacy issue.”

South Carolina labor law attorney Jeremy Summerlin told local media that he believes the bill would be very difficult to implement.

“You put employers in an impossible position,” Summerlin remarked. “You’ve got a (proposed) state law now that says that if you ask about that, and try to comply with federal law, then you are going to jail,” he added.

“What if you ask your coworker about their vaccination status, and you are just having a conversation?” he said. “What if you are a nurse, and you ask a fellow nurse about it? Do you want the local law enforcement to go in and arrest them because of this law?”

The proposed law comes two weeks after the Supreme Court, in a 6–3 majority opinion, blocked an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) emergency temporary standard that required employees at companies with 100 or more workers to either get the vaccine or submit to weekly testing. And on Tuesday, OSHA published an announcement saying it would formally withdraw the rule Wednesday.




January 27, 2022

The SON of Omicron: health expert warns about new Covid-19 variant that's even MORE contagious

A version of Omicron that is even more contagious than the original strain could extend Australia's deadly latest wave of cases, a leading health expert has warned.

The new BA.2 subvariant has been detected across Europe and already makes up 45 per cent of all cases in Denmark.

Scientists fear the 'stealth' variant could also be even harder to track than previous strains as it can only be confirmed through lab analysis rather than a PCR test.

University of Melbourne epidemiologist Professor Nancy Baxter said initial data showed BA.2 could be even more infectious than its more common BA.1 ancestor.

She said it was unclear if BA.2 would worsen the latest wave of Omicron cases or whether it would even land on Australian shores.

'It looks like, if people can believe it, it could be more contagious than Omicron,' she said. 'So if it gets here, it may extend our waves and they may take a lot longer to get out of. But we don't know enough yet, so stay tuned.'

Danish Health Minister Magnus Heunicke on Wednesday said the BA.2 subvariant appeared to be more contagious than the original Omicron variant.

The BA.1 lineage accounts for 98 per cent of all cases globally but in Denmark has been pushed aside by BA.2, which became the dominant strain in the second week of January.

The United Kingdom Health Security Agency has designated BA.2 a variant under investigation, saying it could have a growth advantage.

Preliminary calculations suggest BA.2 could be 1.5 times more infectious than BA.1, Denmark's top infectious disease authority Statens Serum Institute (SSI) said in a note on Wednesday.

However, an initial analysis by the institute showed no difference in the risk of hospitalisation for BA.2 compared to BA.1. "There is some indication that it is more contagious, especially for the unvaccinated, but that it can also infect people who have been vaccinated to a greater extent," SSI's technical director Tyra Grove Krause said at the briefing.

This could mean the peak of Denmark's epidemic will extend a bit further into February than previously forecast, Krause said.

BA.2 cases have also been registered in the UK, Sweden and Norway but to a much lesser extent than in Denmark.

Denmark on Wednesday announced plans to scrap the last of its Covid-19 restrictions by February 1, the latest country in Europe to do so despite record high daily infection numbers


Military Whistleblowers May Blow Up the COVID Vaccine Narrative

On January 26, thousands showed up in Washington, D.C., to protest COVID-19 vaccine mandates. The protest received little if any coverage in the corporate media. To try and give the clinicians and researchers fighting the vaccine mandates more coverage, Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) held an all-day panel on Monday

Two speakers shared some shocking statistics about illness and disease in the military over the 11 months COVID vaccines have been available. Human rights attorney Leigh Dennis raised concerns about data on myocarditis in the Department of Defense (DOD) tracking system. Myocarditis is the only side effect warning the FDA places on the mRNA vaccines.

Dennis told Johnson that in August of 2021, when a DOD report was run on the incidence of acute myocarditis, there were 1,239 cases. When the report is run for the same period now, there are only 307 cases. She added that the initial report for January of 2022 showed 176 cases. Now it only shows 17.

Dennis said the military data was one of the most comprehensive because it contains baseline rates. The occurrence of disease across all categories for the previous five years averaged 1.7 million. Ten months after the vaccine program launched, it jumped to nearly 22 million. Dennis added:

“We need to not be calling this suspicious. With all due respect, we need to be asking hard questions of the DOD. And I will close by saying they are charged at least in part with protecting the sanctity and the welfare of the brave men and women who are defending this country. And right now these numbers indicate something is drastically wrong.”

Dennis is working with attorney Thomas Rentz to support three whistleblowers who are doctors in the military and who signed affidavits under the penalty of perjury. Renz identified them as Lt. Colonel Dr. Theresa Long, Dr. Samuel Sigoloff, and Colonel Dr. Peter Chambers. According to Renz, the data the physicians provided showed alarming increases in several diagnoses:

Data like this provides a signal that requires further investigation. Much like any correlation, researchers must prove causation. However, it does not appear from the testimony that any serious question is underway. There has been anecdotal data on reproductive issues following the vaccines, and the agencies just released information affirming that vaccines can affect a woman’s menstrual cycle. The DOD data, if confirmed, raises questions about safety in pregnancy and childbearing years. Yet, the CDC still recommends vaccines for Americans down to the age of five and pregnant women.

Even more disturbing, Renz alleges the CDC receives data from the Department of Defense through a program called Project Salus. In the weekly report for September 28, 2021, Renz stated that 71% of the new COVID cases and 60% of the hospitalizations were fully vaccinated. Meanwhile, Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared multiple times on television to assert the late summer wave was a pandemic of the unvaccinated.

Unlike the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), where anyone may submit a report, the information provided by these would be more like insurance claims data that contain diagnosis codes. A recent preprint study on claims data from Kaiser Northwest showed the frequency of myopericarditis was 1 in 1,860 for males 18-24 and 1 in 2,650 for boys 12-17. This finding was more than two times higher than the previously cited number from the FDA of 1 in 5,000. It would not be surprising if DOD data showed higher rates of post-vaccine illnesses that the CDC or FDA report from the less rigorous systems the agencies use.

Dennis asked Johnson to take the testimony of the whistleblowers and put them on the record. Johnson committed to taking their transcribed interviews and shared he has put the DOD on notice to preserve all records pending an investigation. As of December 2021, an estimated 40,000 active troops remained unvaccinated and under threat of discharge. Each branch is implementing its own policy under the mandate. Increases in serious illnesses such as cancer and heart disease will further impair military readiness. All while hotspots worldwide, like the Ukrainian border, are heating up.


Two-thirds of Covid cases in England last month may have been in people who were REINFECTED, official data suggests

One of the country's largest surveillance studies — which randomly tested 100,000 people in the fortnight ending January 20 — found 4.4 per cent had the virus.

Imperial College London experts, who carry out the project, said it was the highest rate ever recorded, mirroring other swabbing surveys.

The team also claimed England's Covid outbreak was now starting to plateau after the Omicron wave 'rapidly' dropped off on its own.

Analysis of the data showed 2,315 of the 3,582 positive tests in the sample (64.6 per cent) were people who had coronavirus before.

And a further 267 (7.5 per cent) suspected they had caught Covid previously, even though their case was not confirmed with a test at the time.

Getting Covid after being fully-jabbed triggers 'super-immunity'

Fully-vaccinated people who catch Covid end up with 'super immunity', scientists have claimed.

Oregon Health and Science University experts say the same is also true for people who get infected before getting two jabs.

Academics took blood samples from more than 100 fully-vaccinated volunteers and exposed them against three different strains of coronavirus.

Volunteers with 'hybrid' immunity produced an 'amazingly high' antibody response, tests showed.

Their antibodies were 10 times more potent than proteins made by participants who managed to dodge Covid completely.

Despite the study being carried out before the emergence of Omicron, the authors believe the findings will hold up against the highly-transmissible variant.

And the high levels of protection among those with hybrid immunity could see the virus become a 'mostly mild' infection and bring about the end of the pandemic, the researchers said.

Professor Paul Elliott, director of the REACT programme, told a press briefing: 'What we are essentially seeing is the same sort of people catching Covid before are catching it again.'

The REACT-1 data suggests one in 23 people in England were infected with the virus over that two-week period.

Despite extremely high prevalence last month, cases have been dropping in all age groups other than under-18s.

It was highest in those aged five- to 11-year-olds over the course of the month (7.81 per cent) and lowest in those aged 75 and over (2.43 per cent).

Professor Elliott added: 'There is good news in our data in that infections had been rapidly dropping during January.

'But they are still extremely high and may have recently stalled at a very high prevalence.

'Of particular concern is that there is rapidly increasing prevalence among children now they are mixing more following the start of the school term.

'And, compared with December, prevalence in older people aged 65 and over has increased seven- to 12-fold, which may lead to increased hospitalisations.

'It's therefore vital that we continue to monitor the situation closely to understand the impact of the Omicron variant, which now makes up almost all infections in the country.'

Regionally, Covid was most prevalent in the North East, where 6.85 per cent of residents had the virus during the month.

In comparison only 2.93 per cent of people in the South East ended up testing positive during the month.

Health and Social Care Secretary Sajid Javid said: 'It's reassuring to see Covid infections beginning to slow across the country, as we move back to Plan A.

'Covid rates are still high so as we learn to live with the virus it is vital we continue to be vigilant — wash your hands, let in fresh air, get tested and, if you haven't already, get boosted now.'




January 26, 2022

Pfizer to launch trial of Omicron-targeted COVID vaccine

Pfizer and BioNTech say they have started a clinical trial to test a new version of their vaccine specifically designed to target the COVID-19 Omicron variant, which has eluded some of the protection provided by the original two-dose vaccine regimen.

Banking on volunteers in the United States, the companies plan to test the immune response generated by the Omicron-based vaccine both as a three-shot regimen in unvaccinated people and as a booster shot for people who already received two doses of their original vaccine.

They are also testing a fourth dose of the current vaccine against a fourth dose of the Omicron-based vaccine in people who received a third dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine three to six months earlier.

The companies plan to study the safety and tolerability of the shots in the more than 1400 people who will be enrolled in the trial.

“While current research and real-world data show that boosters continue to provide a high level of protection against severe disease and hospitalisation with Omicron, we recognise the need to be prepared in the event this protection wanes over time and to potentially help address Omicron and new variants in the future,” Pfizer’s head of vaccine research and development, Kathrin Jansen, said in a statement on Wednesday AEDT.

Depending on the amount of clinical trial data required by regulators, it may not be possible to realise a current plan to launch an Omicron-targeting vaccine by the end of March, BioNTech said.

Pfizer has said that two doses of the original vaccine may not be sufficient to protect against infection from Omicron, and that protection against hospitalisations and deaths may be waning.

Still, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention says a third dose of an mRNA vaccine like the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has provided 90 per cent protection against hospitalisation due to COVID-19.

Some countries have already started offering additional booster doses, but a recent study from Israel showed that while a fourth dose of an mRNA vaccine boosted antibodies, the level was not high enough to prevent Omicron infection.

DATA The European Medicines Agency (EMA) said on Friday that international regulators want data from clinical studies like the one being done by Pfizer and BioNTech before approval of a new vaccine.

EMA said these studies should show that the new vaccines elicit more neutralising antibodies in the blood than current vaccines and might also protect against new variants of concern.

BioNTech declined to comment on what type of data it was asked to file with regulators.

It said an analysis of antibodies elicited by its Omicron-targeted booster should help answer whether shots will be needed that address more than one variant at a time. It hopes to show the antibodies neutralise a spectrum of variants.

Still, some scientists question whether any change is currently needed.

“The goal of this vaccine is to protect against serious illness,” said Dr Paul Offit, an infectious disease expert at the University of Pennsylvania. “To date, these vaccines do that, including protection against Omicron.”


Growing up poor affects your BRAIN: Children in low-income households show slower activity in key neural regions linked to thinking and learning, study reveals

This study of cognitive development in neonates is interesting but its generalizability is low. We know that IQ measured in young children shows negligible correlation with IQ in adulthood, for instance. And the lesson from HeadStart is that early improvements fade over time

Children who grow up in poorer households show slower activity in key brain regions linked to both thinking and learning, a study has warned.

Experts from Columbia University found that the brain development of infants in low-income families varied with the amount of financial support they were given.

Scans at age one showed faster brain activity in kids whose families were given $333 (£250) of support monthly compared to those given only $20 (£15) per month.

It is unclear if the differences in brain activity will persist as the children age, or how they might influence cognitive and behavioural growth.

However, in older children, activity in the regions in question has previously been linked to the development of learning skills.

The researchers are now investigating how the payments benefited the children, with possibilities including facilitating better nutrition, or relieving parental stress.

Either way, they said, the results suggest that interventions designed to reduce poverty could benefit infant brain development and improve later outcomes.

The investigation was undertaken by neuroscientist Kimberly Noble of New York's Columbia University and her colleagues.

'The brain changes speak to the remarkable malleability of the brain, especially early in childhood,' said Professor Noble.

'We have known for many years that growing up in poverty puts children at risk for lower school achievement, reduced earnings, and poorer health.

'However, until now, we haven't been able to say whether poverty itself causes differences in child development, or whether growing up in poverty is simply associated with other factors that cause those differences.'

In the study, the researchers measured brain activity levels among a subset of 435 one-year-old children who were participating in the so-called 'Baby's First Years' trial.

This randomised controlled trial into the benefits of poverty reduction has seen 1,000 low-income mothers recruited from postpartum wards in four US metropolitan areas — New Orleans, New York City, Omaha, and Minneapolis–Saint Paul.

The mothers, who were primarily Black or Latina and not college educated, were then given a cash gift of either $333 (£250) or $20 (£15) per month to spend it whatever way they chose.

While these results come from one year into the interventions, the trial is still ongoing, and the mothers will continue to receive the monthly cash gifts until their children are four years and four months old.

Each child's brain activity was measured using an electroencephalography, or 'EEG', machine via an electrode-bearing cap that was placed on the child's head.

The researchers found that children whose mothers were given $333 per month had around 20 per cent more high-frequency brain activity than those whose parents were only given $20 of support monthly.

High-frequency brain activity in the frontal region has previously been linked to both the development of learning and thinking skills.

Professor Noble explained that children’s brains naturally adapt to their experiences. 'All healthy brains are shaped by their environments and experiences, and we are not saying that one group has "better" brains,' she said.

'But — because of the randomized design — we know that the $333 per month must have changed children's experiences or environments, and that their brains adapted to those changed circumstances.'

'Families are all different, and the potential promise of money as a way of directly supporting families is that it allows parents to make choices about what their children most need,' said paper author Katherine Magnuson. 'Thus, there may not be just one way in which money positively affects families; —money may matter in a lot of small ways.

'We hear from the mothers in our study how challenging it is to raise children without enough money. 'A few hundred dollars a month has the potential to do a lot of good for these families, and we are grateful that we will continue to learn from them about how the money has helped them meet their goals.'

'Global evidence is thin on how children are affected by cash transfers, especially with respect to very young children,' said fellow paper author and applied economist Lisa Gennetian of North Carolina's Duke University.

'This is mostly because it is so hard and expensive to objectively capture children's development. This study's findings on infant brain activity are unprecedented.'

The outcomes seen, she added, 'really speak to how anti-poverty policies — including the types of expanded child tax credits being debated in the US — can and should be viewed as investments in children.'


Biden Forced To Bend The Knee To Trump, Admit He Was Right

Joe Biden (well, the people calling the shots for Joe Biden) have made such a mess out of the Southern border that it’s not even funny.

The media fell over itself to label Trump’s border policy a failure, yet have nothing to say when Biden fills cages with kids, to 1700% of capacity … during what we are told is a pandemic.

It really is not even funny. The number of rapes and abuse of children that this administration is responsible for are mind boggling. This administration has committed crimes against humanity not seen since the Obama/Biden admin ran guns to drug cartels.

Things have gotten so bad that Biden has been forced to concede that Trump was right … but you won’t hear this on the TV ‘news’

Conservative Treehouse reported:

‘The JoeBama administration are pathetic in their manipulation of policy.

After taking apart the Trump agreement with central American nations (Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador) to secure their own northern border the mass migration toward the United States began…. a crisis created. However, once the crisis turns public opinion against them, the JoeBama administration then proposes to return to the exact same policy President Trump initiated and Biden destroyed.

The White House and the media then herald the return of the Trump agreement as a groundbreaking new policy initiative instituted by JoeBama. It would be funny, if it were not so ridiculous to watch it in real time.’

CNN repoerted – The Biden administration has secured agreements for Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala to tighten their borders and stem the flow of migration, Special Assistant to the President for Immigration for the Domestic Policy Council Tyler Moran told MSNBC Monday.

“We’ve secured agreements for them to put more troops on their own border. Mexico, Honduras and Guatemala have all agreed to do this. That not only is going to prevent the traffickers, and the smugglers, and cartels that take advantage of the kids on their way here, but also to protect those children,” Moran said.

The Biden administration has struggled to keep up with the influx of migrants coming to the border and as there has been a major spike in the number of migrant children in US custody. (read more)’

They did not ‘struggle’ they created this situation on purpose. They don’t care about all the lives that were and are yet to be ruin from their policies. The left wants everyone equally poor, so poor that they can not revolt.

Unfortunately, they are well on their way to making that a reality.




January 25, 2022

Omicron vaccine on the way

The emphasis on vaccines is wrong headed. Medicines to cure it are the way of the future. Several are now available

The race is on to find a variant-proof vaccine

Since the emergence of Omicron, both Pfizer and Moderna have announced they're working on vaccines to specifically target the variant, with production promised as early as March of this year.

So, are variant-specific vaccines the way we regain control of COVID?

A vaccine targeting Omicron will increase immunity to the variant on both an individual and population level.

However, variant-specific vaccines are ultimately a reactive measure that could always leave us behind the eight ball. By the time we roll out any variant-specific vaccine, a wave of infections driven by that variant may already have peaked, and a new variant will likely be on the way.

The solution to this problem may be "variant-proof" vaccines, also known as "universal" COVID vaccines. These are vaccines that work across different variants, rather than being targeted to a specific variant. These are in development and could be a proactive way to prevent new variants from taking hold.

Variant-specific vaccines could take too long to roll out
Scientists have little doubt vaccination with an Omicron-specific vaccine will provide enhanced immunity to Omicron.

Approvals of these new vaccines should be comparatively rapid because they're similar to previously approved vaccines, though some additional data on safety and efficacy will be required.

Reactively relying on developing variant-specific vaccines, even under idealised production and distribution systems, would always leave us vulnerable to disruptive waves of infection and pose ongoing challenges to health strategies.

Waves of new variants would engulf the population faster than variant-specific vaccines could ever be deployed.

Mass infection isn't likely to protect against future variants
Health officials predict almost all Australians will soon be exposed to Omicron.

This has left many wondering if mass exposure could finally provide us with the antibody protection required for the fabled "herd immunity", making the need for future variant-specific vaccines unnecessary.

A small-scale pre-print study, yet to be reviewed by other scientists, suggests infection with Omicron did produce some antibodies that could neutralise Delta, but only around a quarter the magnitude of those produced against the infecting variant.

Whether these antibodies would be sufficient to protect against the infection from the Delta or other variants, remains to be established.

Most antibodies induced by vaccination and natural infection predominantly target regions of the virus that can easily mutate.

It's plausible the next variants that emerge could be even more different in this region than Delta or Omicron. This means it could evade current antibody responses induced by infection, or by vaccines specific for either the original virus or the Omicron variant.

So it's likely mass infection with Omicron won't protect us from catching future variants.

Here's where a variant-proof vaccine comes in

These are vaccines which generate antibodies to regions of the virus that cannot be easily mutated.

The goal of using such vaccines across the population is to protect us not just against current variants of the virus, but also against future variants.

Unlike the current reactive strategy of generating variant-specific vaccines following the emergence of a new invasive threat, a universal vaccine could be used to prevent a new variant from ever taking hold.


Dissecting the supreme court's split decision on vaccine mandates

Major issues remain to be resolved with respect to the Chevron doctrine and agency power and the question of what police power, if any, the federal government has.

The Supreme Court has issued its opinions in the two vaccine mandate cases. In the case involving the mandate that all employers with 100 or more employees require their staff to be vaccinated (with very limited exceptions), the Court, by a 6-3 vote, reinstated an injunction against the regulation adopted by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) being enforced. The Justices in the majority were Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett. The dissenters were Justices Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan.

In the case involving the mandate that all healthcare workers at facilities that receive Medicare or Medicaid funds be vaccinated (with the exception of employees who telecommute entirely) or that the medical facility with unvaccinated healthcare workers would be barred from participating in Medicare and Medicaid, the Court, by a 5-4 vote, lifted the injunction against the applicable regulation. The Justices in the majority were Justices Roberts, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan and Kavanaugh. The dissenters were Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett.

Note that the switch by Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh from blocking a vaccine mandate in the one case to allowing a vaccine mandate in the other case created the mess and confusion about the power of the Federal government to mandate that Americans be jabbed with a vaccine or lose their jobs. This reinforces the “enigma of Justice Roberts” and perhaps the alliance in that “enigma” of Justice Kavanaugh.

Before we object that it is unfair to call these votes a reinforcement of such an “enigma” since Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh are part of a conservative majority committed to enforcing and interpreting the Constitution as written and generally join the Court’s conservatives in opinions of the Court and in dissents, let me say that I am not suggesting that Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh have followed in the footsteps of Justices like Justice Souter, who once appointed and seated, became a reliable liberal vote.

The reason I say “enigma” is that in major cases where the weight of the major liberal institutions in the media and the universities and the leaders of the Democrats express outrage at the possibility of striking at one of their sacred cows and they scream about a partisan Court, Roberts has generally sided with the Court liberals and increasingly so has Kavanaugh. We saw how Justice Roberts stretched and twisted to find a way to uphold the Affordable Care Act and avoid the questions of whether the Federal government could mandate that every person have health insurance and whether the statute violated the Commerce Clause. The question is why.

I wish I could say it was simply an honest disagreement based on the legal reasoning of Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh, but it appears that they are bending to the demands that the Court not be or appear to be partisan. It may also be, in the case of Justice Kavanaugh, that the vicious attacks on him during his confirmation hearing, have made him gun shy. As I discuss the healthcare worker mandate below, I will return to this very important question.

The opinion in the healthcare worker mandate case was an unsigned per curium opinion, meaning that no author was identified and that all 5 of the Justices in the majority agreed, with none issuing a concurring opinion. For those readers who don’t know the purpose of a concurring opinion, it allows a Justices to vote with the majority but explain where he or she has different reasons or doesn’t agree with statements in the majority opinion while still voting for the result. The Court’s opinion relied on numerous statutes (a “hodgepodge” in the words of the dissenters and many commentators) to conclude the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services had the authority to issue the regulation creating the mandate.

The Court said that the Secretary of Health and Human Services “has general statutory authority to promulgate regulations ‘as may be necessary to the efficient administration of the functions with which [he] is charged’…” -- 42USC Section1302(a) -- and that “one such function, perhaps the most basic, given the Department’s core mission is to ensure that the healthcare providers who care for Medicare and Medicaid patient protect those patients’ health and safety.” The Court further said that Congress authorized the Secretary “to promulgate, as a condition to a facility’s participating in the programs, such requirements as [he] finds necessary in the interest of the health and safety of individuals who are furnished services in the institutions.” (42USC Section 1395(c)(9). The Court noted that, in adopting the healthcare worker mandate and relying on these statutes, the Secretary “further noted that staffing shortages caused by COVID-19 related exposure and illness has disrupted patientcare.” That is a rather ironic justification since the regulation will result in many healthcare workers losing their jobs.

Now it should be noted that Congress adopts laws and under the Court’s delegation doctrine, Congress cannot delegate its legislative power to regulatory agencies. There are two important ancillaries that have followed in Supreme Court opinions.

One is what is known as the Chevron doctrine. That comes from a 1984 Supreme Court opinion in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. in which the Court said that whenever a regulatory agency makes a rule or regulation which deals with a statute adopted by Congress -- and there is ambiguity in the statutory language or the intent of Congress is not clear, and there is any reasonable way to argue that such rule or regulation is consistent with the statute under which it is acting -- the Court will defer to the regulatory agency. The Court said that determining the intent of Congress often requires the opinions of experts and that judges should not interpose their own preferences.

The many subsequent cases applying this doctrine are beyond the scope of this article, but the core concept has been extremely consequential. It is at the heart of the growth of the regulatory state in which Congress adopts ambiguous or broad law and lets the agencies fill in the blanks. That absolves Congress from having to take actions that may be unpopular or consequential and it takes the general public out of the equation since regulators are not elected. The enormous power given to the regulatory agencies by the Chevron doctrine has been a prime factor in the enormous growth of the Federal government. The possibility that the Court would reverse or weaken Chevron terrifies fans of big government because without the ability to freeze out Congress and thus the public through their ability to vote for their elected members of Congress, many radical or so called “progressive” policies would have no chance of adoption.

The second ancillary is known as the “major questions doctrine.” This doctrine holds that courts should not defer to regulatory agency interpretations in matters that have “vast economic significance.” The Court has said repeatedly in subsequent cases that Congress must speak clearly if it intends to give a regulatory agency the authority to act in a particular way. Justice Kavanaugh addressed this doctrine in response to questions during his confirmation hearing when he said: “I’m not a skeptic of regulation at all. I am a skeptic of unauthorized regulation, of illegal regulation, or regulation that’s outside the bounds of what the laws passed by Congress have said. And that is what is at the root of our administrative law jurisprudence.” As we discuss the dissents, consider if Justice Kavanaugh’s interpretation of the “major questions doctrine” has been applied by Justice Kavanaugh.

As stated above, there were 4 dissenters. Three were 2 written dissenting opinions—by Justice Thomas and Justice Alito, and Justices Gorsuch and Barrett joined in both of these dissents.

Justice Thomas described the “major questions doctrine,” and he said there is no question the healthcare worker mandate falls within its scope. He noted that 10 million workers across the entire country are affected by either getting vaccinated or losing their jobs. He noted that nothing in the statutes on which the agency relied had clear language that could possibly empower the agency to make this mandate. Then he noted that: “Vaccines mandates fall squarely within a state police power”, citing Zuch v King 260 US 174 (1920). This case is a bedrock of federalism. Justice Thomas further said: “We expect Congress to use exceedingly clear language if it wishes to significantly alter the balance between state and federal power.” Allowing the healthcare worker mandate to go into effect as the Court has done will allow the federal government to intrude on the police power of the states.

Justice Alito said: “Under the constitution, laws that impose obligations on the American people is conferred on Congress, whose members are elected by the people… Today, however, most federal law is not made by Congress. It comes in the form of rules issued by unelected administrators, except in rare cases.” This was a direct attack on the administrative state.

Major issues remain to be resolved with respect to the Chevron doctrine and agency power and the question of what police power, if any, the federal government has. We will watch keenly in future case and with particular interest in the cases of Justice Roberts and Kavanaugh.




24 January, 2022

Vaccine-induced heart damage is a real risk for young males

As has been long established, myocarditis is the most documented adverse reaction from the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. A number of studies have established the risk of myocarditis as highly stratified by age and gender. A study from Israel found that males aged 16 to 29 faced the greatest risk, with around 11 in 100,000 males developing post-vaccination myocarditis. A pre-print study last year comparing risks of infection versus vaccination found that boys aged 12 to 15 were four to six times more likely to develop myocarditis from the vaccine than become hospitalized with any Covid-related condition (in the broadest possible sense, including incidental cases—meaning the relative myocarditis risk is likely understated).

The specific point of causality has not been identified by scientists yet, as the vaccines are experimental by nature and their long-term implications are not fully understood. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal compiles the leading hypotheses for what is causing this adverse event. One newly emerging theory relates to the way the vaccine is injected into the body:

“The shots are supposed to be injected into the shoulder muscle, also known as the deltoid muscle. If the injection accidentally reaches a vein, it could lead to delivery of some of the vaccine to the heart through blood vessels.”

As for the gender-specific risk, some scientists speculate it is due to higher testosterone levels in men:

“That myocarditis appears to happen more among younger males after vaccination than in other age and sex groups suggests a link to the hormone testosterone, which is usually at high levels in younger males, according to researchers. Testosterone may heighten an inflammatory immune response, Dr. Bozkurt said, leading to myocarditis in some male adolescents and young men.”

The consistently identified risk in young males across different countries, medical journals, and research institutes warrant serious caution and re-evaluation of fully vaccinating healthy young males—given their extremely low risk of serious illness or death from Covid. Public health officials in Norway, the UK, and Hong Kong have acted with commendable prudence, offering only one dose of the vaccine to young people since myocarditis cases are clustered after the second dose. Other countries such as Finland, France, and Germany have advised against administration of the Moderna vaccine in males under the age of 30 because of higher rates of myocarditis compared to the Pfizer vaccine.

However, both Canada and the United States have adopted a one-size-fits-all policy, making no medically tailored recommendations for teenagers and young adults.

As a 20-year-old healthy male myself, who has suffered from minor heart complications in early adolescence (irregular heart palpitations), I have decided not to take the vaccine. As a result of my personal health decision informed by my physician, my social and physical well-being has been significantly compromised. The Canadian government (both provincial and federal) has implemented coercive and draconian vaccination policies, limiting the freedoms of the unvaccinated across various parts of society.

Much of my social life in Vancouver has been restricted and my ability to maintain physical fitness—a preventative measure that reduces risk of serious Covid illness—has been radically hampered. With the rest of unvaccinated Canadians over 12 years of age, I am barred from exercising at a gym, going to nightclubs, bars, large gatherings, and weddings. Worst, I am now landlocked in Canada and unable to leave the country to do media appearances in the United States and visit my family in India. I was recently planning to go to Florida to do Ben Shapiro’s show, but the government won’t even let me board a domestic flight.

In what world is this fair?

Under governmental pressure, public organizations have also stepped up their efforts in mandating vaccination for the young. In Ontario, Canada the biggest youth hockey league (OMHA) recently mandated all players 12 and over to be vaccinated. OMHA President Bob Hill gave a statement on the league’s decision:

“We know that the environment around return to play is a real concern for a large proportion of hockey families …. Our game is played in an indoor environment where there can be close contact, and we must do everything possible to reduce the risk of any transmission around the rink. It is the duty for our players, our officials and our communities.”

Unless one is willing to give their child an insufficiently tested booster shot on a likely 6-month basis, such a rationale being used to push child vaccine mandates falls apart under closer scrutiny. Vaccine efficacy against infection significantly drops over time (an idea which up until last summer was considered right-wing conspiracy). A study published in The Lancet showed a 55 percent reduction in vaccine effectiveness against infection five months post-vaccination, a trend which spirals downward over time. Any public benefit that child vaccination would bring is temporary and short-lived.

I asked Dr. Mike Hart (known for his appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast), one of my consulting physicians who runs a top medical clinic in Ontario, what he thought about such a mandate:

“I don’t think this is a good policy. For vulnerable populations, vaccines make sense; but for young healthy people, the risks of the vaccine may outweigh the benefits.

“The risk of myocarditis from COVID is much higher than the risk of myocarditis from the vaccine in the general population, but in younger cohorts, the best available evidence suggests that’s not true.”

Unfortunately, medical experts such as Dr. Hart who consider both the costs and benefits of the vaccine have been marginalized by spokespeople of the medical establishment who are bizarrely devoted to vaccinating everyone regardless of their individual risk-benefit proposition.

When CNN’s chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast and was repeatedly asked about myocarditis risk in young males, he responded with the claim that most myocarditis patients experience mild symptoms and recover quickly. When celebrity physician Dr. Oz was asked the same question by FOX 29 Philadelphia earlier this year, he replied in nearly identical fashion: myocarditis is a mild, easily curable medical condition and shouldn’t discourage healthy male teenagers from receiving the vaccine.

However, myocarditis has long been documented as a cause of chronic fatigue, shortness of breath and chest pain, leading to disruptions in physical activity. A number of top cardiologists across the country—such as Dr. John Mandrola, Dr. Amy Kontorovich, and Dr. Venk Murthy—have publicly spoken out against minimization of vaccine-induced myocarditis.

According to Dr. Kontorovich, professor of medicine and cardiology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai,

“[M]any of those affected are young people who were previously healthy and are now on three or more heart medications and potentially out of work due to symptoms, even if their heart function is ‘back to normal.’”

University of Michigan cardiologist Dr. Venk Murthy has also noted,

“People with myocarditis are usually counseled to limit activity, placed on 1 or more meds and are at lifetime increased risk of cardiac complications. This can have profound consequences. … [They] are typically told to limit activity for several months, sometimes longer. This means no sports. Some kids are told not to carry books to school.”

In attempts to downplay these real, quantifiable risks, those with the most powerful voices in the medical community perform glaringly disprovable sleight-of-hand distortions of the scientific research on mainstream networks. When discussing his viral JRE appearance on Erin Burnett’s CNN program, Dr. Sanjay Gupta addressed the public concern of myocarditis for vaccinating teenagers by presenting a study finding infection-induced myocarditis poses a greater risk compared to the vaccine.

A cursory reading of the study reveals it is irrelevant to the cost-benefit analysis of vaccinating healthy young males. The post-vaccination myocarditis rate of 2.7 per 100,000 people is derived from a highly diverse population (in age and gender) with a median age of 38 years in the study. Moreover, the specific age group among the highest at risk of myocarditis—12 to 15 year olds—was not included in the studied population. The alarming concern is with young males specifically, not the general population. And yet, the CNN segment closed with Erin Burnett summarizing this total falsehood based on Dr. Gupta’s stunningly dishonest analysis of the issue:

“The number one [vaccine] risk you do hear about for young boys is myocarditis. You’re saying you have about five times greater risk of getting that from Covid than the vaccine. I think that’s an incredibly powerful, just basic statistic for people to know.”

Another viral clip of Joe Rogan talking about myocarditis has been exploited by the media to promote their universal vaccination agenda:

The study in the article Rogan looks at finding a higher risk of infection-induced myocarditis than from the vaccine is severely flawed. As practicing physician and epidemiologist Tracy Høeg has pointed out, the authors of the study vastly underestimate both the incidence of Covid infections (thereby exaggerating the infection risk) and post-vaccine myocarditis. The latter is underestimated by a factor of three or four at least.

As a result, the authors fallaciously conclude post-infection myocarditis poses a higher risk than post-vaccine myocarditis in young males.

The aforementioned pre-print by Oxford researchers published last month is the most comprehensive, robust, and rigorous analysis of relative myocarditis risk.

Neither the risk of Covid or vaccine side effects is equally distributed across the population. While the general risk is minuscule, the individual risk of vaccine-induced myocarditis in young males between the ages of 18 and 24 is roughly 1 in 2,000 according to a recent study by top infectious disease physician Dr. Katie A. Sharff. According to this calculation, one million administrations of the vaccine in this age group would yield 500 cases of heart inflammation in kids who were otherwise at near-zero risk of Covid.

Supporting the vaccine means honestly discussing the real risks of vaccination in specific demographics—without either agenda-driven minimization or exaggeration. Obfuscating, downplaying, and misleading the public, on the other hand, undermines trust in the vaccine—a miraculous scientific innovation that has transformed the course of the pandemic by preventing millions of deaths and cases of severe disease.

Honesty, nuance, and compassion are especially needed when it comes to personal health choices. We are only born with one body and we must make medically informed decisions at our own volition without governmental coercion or political pressure.

More here:


Surgical face masks make people look more attractive, new study finds

Striding up to greet someone for the first time with half your face obscured, doesn't exactly fill you with meet-cute confidence.

But a new study by British academics suggests that protective face masks can make you more attractive — particularly the blue surgical kind.

Seven months after masks became mandatary in the United Kingdom, researchers at Cardiff University were curious to know whether the pandemic had altered perceptions of attractiveness.

Cardiff University school of psychology's Michael Lewis, the study's co-author and an expert in the psychology of faces, spoke about the findings after the pandemic began.

"Research carried out before the pandemic found medical face masks reduce attractiveness," Dr Lewis said.

"So, we wanted to test whether this had changed since face coverings became ubiquitous and [to] understand whether the type of mask had any effect."

The study — published in the peer-reviewed journal Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications — asked 43 women to rate the attractiveness of 40 male faces, with and without different types of masks and coverings.

Dr Lewis said they were surprised by the results, which indicated an overall sentiment of mask positivity.

"Our study suggests faces are considered most attractive when covered by medical face masks," he said.

"This may be because we're used to healthcare workers wearing blue masks and now we associate these with people in caring or medical professions."

In their pre-pandemic research, participants had said they associated masks with disease and would avoid people who wore them.

But the research conducted in February 2021 — which will be continued to see if the results are true for both genders — also found that faces were considered significantly more attractive when covered by cloth masks than when not covered at all.

"The current research shows the pandemic has changed our psychology in how we perceive the wearers of masks," Dr Lewis said.




23 January, 2022

Dr. Peter McCullough: Vaccines Failed in Stopping COVID-19 and Mandates Have to Be Dropped

“The vaccines themselves have basically now become obsolete as the virus has continued to mutate,” McCullough told NTD’s “Capitol Report” in an interview broadcast on Wednesday. “So at this point of time, the vaccine mandates have to be dropped across the board.”

McCullough said some recent studies have shown the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines dropped significantly with the new variants.

“There’s a paper by Young-Xu in JAMA, the prior Delta strain that was only about 20 percent covered by the vaccines. Vaccines were very ineffective against Delta,” McCullough said.

The study, which is peer-reviewed and published on the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) last month, found that during the high-Delta period, the estimated vaccine effectiveness was 62.0 percent in the first month and decreased to 57.8 percent by month three. The decrease in vaccine effectiveness accelerated after month four, reaching a low of approximately 20 percent in months five through seven.

“And now a paper from Hansen from Denmark, and from the UK public health security report indicated, against Omicron the vaccines are basically ineffective,” McCullough continued.

The Danish study, a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed, found that vaccine effectiveness against Omicron was initially 55.2 percent and 36.7 percent for Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, respectively, but waned rapidly over time. By comparison, vaccine effectiveness against Delta was significantly higher and better preserved over the same period.

The UK Health Security Agency report released on Dec. 31 also found that vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron variant is significantly lower than compared to the Delta variant and wanes rapidly.

“Among those who had received 2 doses of AstraZeneca, there was no effect against Omicron from 20 weeks after the second dose. Among those who had received 2 doses of Pfizer or Moderna, effectiveness dropped from around 65 to 70 percent down to around 10 percent by 20 weeks after the second dose,” the report (pdf) states.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been saying the COVID-19 vaccines are “safe and effective,” and serious adverse events are rare.

“The only thing the vaccines could have done is reduce the chances of getting COVID-19. … So many millions of Americans who have taken the vaccines have been disappointed to find out they contracted COVID-19 anyway,” McCullough continued.

On Wednesday, the CDC published a study showing protection from prior infection, or so-called natural immunity, was better than the protection from COVID-19 vaccines against the Delta variant.

McCullough also said the vaccine mandates lack the ethical or legal standing in the first place because the COVID-19 vaccines are “investigational.”

“All the vaccines are still investigational and in research. Mandates had no ethical or moral or legal standing from that perspective. No one can be forced into research against their will or be coerced into it.”

A spokesperson from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), didn’t answer directly whether COVID-19 vaccines are investigational, but told The Epoch Times that “all of the vaccines are under an EUA except for Comirnaty, which is fully approved.”

In a guidance (pdf) issued last year, FDA said emergency use authorizations (EUAs) are issued for investigational vaccines to prevent COVID-19 during the pandemic.

“We can’t have Americans have fear about losing their job or school or travel related to a failed vaccine,” McCullough said. “But even more so we need to re-examine what we’ve done with respect to our public health priorities and COVID-19.”

McCullough said that in March and April 2020 America should have had large randomized trials and moved very quickly into studying multi-drug treatment. However, the federal authorities refused to do so and made a big push for vaccines.

McCullough also shared the treatment for COVID-19 patients with the Omicron variant.

“Fortunately with the Omicron variants very mild, the main treatment is oral nasal virucidal washes with dilute povidone-iodine or hydrogen peroxide 12. Clinical trials show the biggest benefit of that is more than any other form of treatment,” McCullough said.

Occasionally patients may need additional oral drugs and Pfizer and Merck pills could be featured, the renowned cardiologist and epidemiologist added.

“And for severe cases we can use Sotrovimab, which is the GSK monoclonal antibody, may be in a high-risk senior or special case,” McCullough said.

“The vaccines aren’t treatment, they offered no hope of treating a patient once they contracted COVID-19. And we knew with respiratory virus they were very unlikely to be effective,” said the doctor.

The CDC has been saying that the COVID-19 vaccines could reduce severe illness and death, and vaccinated people should get a booster to keep up the protection.


Olympic Athlete Reveals Chilling Side Effect of COVID Booster

Professional athletes fine-tune their bodies in an effort to be the best in the world — but what happens when something goes wrong with a medical procedure?

That’s the unfortunate position Swiss sprinter and Olympian Sarah Atcho found herself in after having a severe reaction to a COVID-19 booster vaccine.

The 26-year-old who competed in the 2016 and 2020 Olympic Games took to social media on Monday to share her experience with the world, giving a matter-of-fact account of a possibly life-changing event.

“Obviously as you know, I’m trying to be as transparent as I can and now is more important than ever,” she began her lengthy post.

“On December 22 I got my booster vaccination because I didn’t want to struggle with this when the season started. I was told that it was safer to get Pfizer (even though I had Moderna the first time) to avoid cardiac side effects,” she wrote.

A recent study found that Moderna’s vaccine is four times more likely to cause heart inflammation than Pfizer’s. Sweden and Finland have both halted its use.

“On December 27 I felt a tightness in the chest and started feeling dizzy while walking up the stairs,” the young athlete continued.

“This happened a few more times until I decided to check with a cardiologist who diagnosed me with pericarditis (inflammation of the thin membrane surrounding the heart).”

Atcho went on to say she would have to take time off from activities that increased her heart rate.

“I have to admit that I am upset at the situation because we don’t talk enough about the side effects. I feel helpless since this is completely out of my control,” Atcho disclosed.

“I am glad the vaccine helped avoid many deaths and reduce the pressure on the hospitals and hospital staff however I am frustrated that myself as well as other young and healthy people are suffering from these heavy side effects,” she added.

There have been other anecdotal accounts of young athletes experiencing serious side effects such as myocarditis and pericarditis after receiving COVID-19 vaccines, but officials still insist this occurrence is rare.

Of course, it’s hard to tell, since even talking about vaccine side effects or expressing skepticism about the jab is enough to get a person de-platformed.

Dr. Robert Malone, who was instrumental in inventing the mRNA technology used in the COVID-19 vaccines, was thrown off Twitter for expressing his concerns that the vaccines may be doing more harm than good.

Regardless of whether Malone is correct or not, any treatment or procedure should be able to withstand the scrutiny that comes with speaking about its potential side effects.

Perhaps Atcho is a one-in-a-million case — who knows? But the fact that vaccine injury is a subject too taboo to discuss in public raises major red flags.


New sub-variant of Omicron under investigation as it sweeps Europe

A new sister subtype of the Covid Omicron variant, which may be more transmissible and harder to track, has begun rearing its head overseas in recent days.

The subtype is being referred to as BA. 2, while the original Omicron, currently sweeping through Australia, is known by scientists as BA. 1.

While cases of the BA. 2 type of Omicron remain low across various European countries, it could be just a matter of time before it arrives in Australia.

Scientists are still however working to determine whether the subtype, which had infected 53 people in the UK up to January 10, is more severe than the original BA. 1 type.

While the Health Security Agency has designated BA. 2 as a variant under investigation, its UK incident director Dr Meera Chand said such subtypes were to be expected.

“It is the nature of viruses to evolve and mutate, so it’s to be expected that we will continue to see new variants emerge,” she said, according to Metro.

There had been early indications the BA. 2 type may be more transmissible than BA. 1, however in Denmark, where it accounts for about half of Omicron cases, no stark differences in hospitalisations had yet been noted.

Denmark’s Statens Serum Institute this week said it was likely vaccines had an effect against severe BA. 2 infections, which had several differences to BA.1.

One difference was that BA. 2 had shown positive for the S-gene, while BA. 1 did not.

The lack of S-gene in BA. 1 was a key component in tracking Omicron’s early spread, as it was a feature that distinguished it from Delta.

The same feature however may be what makes BA. 2 infections harder to track.

Scientists are still confident it will be picked up in certain tests though.

Virologist from the Imperial College of London, Tom Peacock, said while early trends suggested BA. 2 was more transmissible, more research was required.

“BA. 2 appears to be the major Omicron lineage in (part of) India and the Philippines and there is evidence it is growing compared to BA. 1 in Denmark, the UK and Germany,” one recent tweet read.

“Consistent growth across multiple countries is evidence BA. 2 may be some degree more transmissible than BA.1. This is the main reason BA. 2 is currently in the news.

“Unfortunately this is really where the evidence mostly ends – we do not currently have a strong handle on antigenicity, severity or a much evidence for how much more transmissibility BA. 2 might have over BA. 1 – however we can make some guesses/early observations.”

He added how “very early observations” from India and Denmark suggested there was no dramatic difference in severity when compared to BA.1.

“This data should become more solid (one way or another) in the coming weeks,” he said.

Mr Peacock also predicted BA. 2 would not have a “substantial” impact on the Omicron wave, which he expected was past its peak already in many countries.




22 January, 2022

CDC Study: Natural Immunity Provides Significantly More Protection Against COVID Than Vaccination Only

A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released on Wednesday shows that those who have recovered from COVID-19 have more protection against infection than those who have only been vaccinated.

Researchers reviewed data from California and New York from May to November, when the delta variant was dominant in the U.S.

The study looked at four groups of people: unvaccinated with no prior COVID-19 infection, vaccinated with no prior infection, unvaccinated who recovered from COVID-19, and vaccinated who recovered.

By the first week of October, COVID-19 rates among the vaccinated with no previous infection were 6.2 times lower in California and 4.5 times lower in New York than among the unvaccinated with no previous infection.

However, among the unvaccinated with a previous infection, the COVID-19 rate was 29 times lower in California and 14.7 times lower in New York.

The individuals most protected against infection were those who had previously had COVID-19 and were also vaccinated. Their infection rate was 32.5 times lower in California and 19.8 times lower in New York.

“These results demonstrate that vaccination protects against COVID-19 and related hospitalization, and that surviving a previous infection protects against a reinfection and related hospitalization,” the CDC determined.

The agency noted that natural immunity proved more efficacious as the delta variant became predominant and vaccine-induced immunity for many began to wane.

The CDC also highlighted that the study took place before omicron became the dominant variant in the U.S. and before the impact of booster shots could be adequately measured.

Dr. Benjamin Silk of the CDC told the media on Wednesday, “Before the delta variant, COVID-19 vaccination resulted in better protection against a subsequent infection than surviving a previous infection,” CNN reported.

“When looking at the summer and the fall of 2021, when delta became the dominant in this country, however, surviving a previous infection now provided greater protection against subsequent infection than vaccination,” he added.

Dr. Eli Rosenberg, New York state deputy director for science said the safest course of action for those who have never had COVID-19 is to get vaccinated.

“Having COVID the first time carries with it significant risks, and becoming vaccinated and staying up-to-date with boosters really is the only safe choice for preventing COVID infection and severe disease,” he said.

Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, has faulted policymakers for being too slow to acknowledge natural immunity.

“The pandemic of the unvaccinated is a misnomer. It’s a pandemic of the non-immune,” he tweeted in July.

“More precisely, it’s a series of regional outbreaks in select pockets of the country with low population immunity,” Makary said. “Same take-home message though: If you’re not immune, get immune by getting vaxed.”


The very concerning data from Scotland

“The vaccines are incredibly safe. They protect us against Omicron; they protect us against Delta; they protect us against COVID." Those were the words of fully vaccinated CDC Director Rochelle Walensky while testifying before the Senate Health Committee with two masks on her face on Jan. 11.

Scottish data shows that the COVID-19 age-standardized case rate is highest among the two-dose vaccinated and lowest among unvaccinated! It further shows this trend of negative efficacy for the double-vaccinated persisting for hospitalizations and deaths. Something is very wrong here, and together with other data points, it raises concerning questions about the negative effect of waning antibodies, constant boosting, and the consequences of a leaky vaccine with narrow-spectrum suboptimal antibodies against an ever-evolving virus.

Every Wednesday, Public Health Scotland (PHS) has been publishing a weekly report on COVID data juxtaposed to vaccination rates. Table 14 of this week’s “Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report” lays bare in plain English (and math) a rate of negative efficacy for the vaccine:

As you can see, while the overall Omicron wave seems to be receding in Scotland, age-standardized case rates per 100,000 people were the lowest in the unvaccinated cohort every week for the past four weeks. Thus, it’s not just the fact that the unvaccinated accounted for only 11.5% of cases the past two weeks, but even adjusted for age-stratified vaccination rates (PHS already does the math for you) the unvaccinated had the lowest infection rate out of the four cohorts – especially during the peak of Omicron. Furthermore, we see that even the triple-vaccinated clearly have no efficacy against infection, although they have some degree less negative efficacy than the double-vaccinated.

Here is a linear presentation of the depth of the Omicron wave by vaccination status, where you can see that the unvaccinated had the shallowest wave:

This also coincides with the latest data from the U.K. Health Security Agency of the entire United Kingdom. This data now shows higher rates of infection among the triple-vaccinated in all but the youngest people.

Full stop right here. Any public policy measure – from vaccine passports to discrimination – cannot be justified under the science, even if one’s conscience is OK with apartheid. In fact, clearly this shows that, especially with Omicron, the vaccinated are the super-spreaders. Before we get to hospitalizations and deaths, the notion that the unvaccinated are somehow responsible for the continued spread of this virus is completely contradicted by the data. Some might suggest without evidence that the unvaccinated possibly have a higher rate of prior infection; however, Omicron seems to attack even those who already had previous versions of SARS-CoV-2.

Now onto hospitalizations and deaths. While the vaccines clearly provided some degree of protection for some people for several months against severe illness (while possibly causing even more spread), the Scottish data paints a concerning picture of the long-term consequences of the mass vaccination. People like Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche have been warning that if you mass-vaccinate with a leaky, narrow-spectrum (only recognizes spike protein) vaccine in middle of a raging pandemic, the virus would get more virulent over time.

This concern manifests itself at two time periods when the antibodies are “sub-optimal.” There is a period of a few weeks after the jab when the antibodies are strong enough to bind but not strong enough to neutralize, and then at the back end (estimated at four to six months for the original shot, but likely much shorter for the booster), a period when they wane. The media and public health tyrants like to focus your attention on a snapshot of time, but ignore the totality of circumstances that the shots are creating negative efficacy before and after, while using accounting gimmicks to mask the problem.

Remember how the lockdowns were hailed as a success for a number of countries that initially did well, while Sweden now has the lowest rate of excess mortality in Europe in 2021?

More here:


A Deceptive Covid Study, Unmasked

Duke researchers look at transmission in schools and end up reinforcing their prior assumptions.

“Follow the science,” we keep hearing, but sometimes scientists and the media present findings in a misleading way. Consider a new study by Duke University’s ABC Science Collaborative, conducted in partnership with the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Researchers examined the effect of a “test to stay” approach to schoolchildren identified as “close contacts” of Covid-positive people. Test to stay excuses these children from quarantining if they test negative for the virus. The study’s primary conclusion was that test to stay is a good way to move away from lengthy quarantine.

That’s reasonable and useful. But the researchers peppered their report with rhetorical sleights of hand aimed at misleading readers into other, less well-founded conclusions that were mostly inevitable products of their own study design. One of their primary conclusions is that “in schools with universal masking, test-to-stay is an effective strategy.” That invites readers to assume that test-to-stay doesn’t work without forced masking. But since they studied no unmasked schools, this conclusion is baseless. An honest report would either have said so or not mentioned masking at all.

Duke’s Press office amplified the unfounded conclusion in its Jan. 4 summary of the study: “Children and staff who repeatedly test negative for COVID-19 after contact with someone who has the illness can safely remain in school if universal masking programs are in place.” The media took this press release and added a further layer of falsehood. Raleigh’s WRAL characterized the study as a defense of forced masking while pitching the study as documenting the danger of youth sports: “Athletics were the source of 50% of all COVID-19 school transmission found in the study.”


England Ends All COVID Passports, Mask Mandates, Work Restrictions

Restrictions including COVID-19 passes, mask mandates, and work-from-home guidance will be removed in England, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced on Wednesday.

Johnson also suggested that self-isolation rules may also be thrown out at the end of March as the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic becomes endemic.

Effective immediately, the UK government is no longer asking people to work from home.

The COVID pass mandate for nightclubs and large events won’t be renewed when it expires on Jan. 26.

Also from Jan. 27, indoor mask-wearing will no longer be compulsory anywhere in England.

The requirement for secondary school pupils to wear masks during class and in communal areas will be lifted on Jan. 20. The Department for Education is expected to update its national guidance soon.

Health Secretary Sajid Jajid will also announce plans to ease restrictions on care home visits in the coming days.

Roaring cheers from lawmakers could be heard in the House of Commons following Johnson’s announcements on masks.

People who test positive for COVID-19 and their unvaccinated contacts are still required to self-isolate, but Johnson said he “very much expect[s] not to renew” the rule when the relevant regulations expire on March 24.

“As COVID becomes endemic, we will need to replace legal requirements with advice and guidance, urging people with the virus to be careful and considerate of others,” the prime minister said.

Asked to remove testing rules for vaccinated UK-bound travellers, Johnson said the government is reviewing the testing arrangements on travel and that an announcement can be expected in the coming days.

But he refused to reconsider the vaccination mandate for frontline health care workers, insisting “the evidence is clear that health care professionals should get vaccinated.”

Johnson told MPs that the Cabinet decided to remove its so-called “Plan B” measures on Wednesday morning as data suggest the Omicron wave has peaked nationally, and he attributed stabilising hospital admission numbers to “the extraordinary booster campaign” and the public’s compliance to the restriction measures.




21 January, 2022

Researcher Calls Out Censorship After Journal Pulls COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Events Analysis

Jessica Rose didn’t ask for any of this. She started to analyze data on adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccines simply as an exercise to master a new piece of software. But she couldn’t ignore what she saw and decided to publish the results of her analysis. The next thing she knew, she was in a “bizzarro world,” she told The Epoch Times.

A paper she co-authored based on her analysis was withdrawn by the academic journal Elsevier under circumstances that raised eyebrows among her colleagues. The journal declined to comment on the matter.

Rose received her PhD in computational biology from the Bar-Ilan University in Israel. After finishing her post-doctoral studies on molecular dynamics of certain proteins, she was looking for a new challenge. Switching to a new statistical computing software, she was looking for an interesting data set to sharpen her skills on. She picked the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a database of reports of health problems that have occurred after a vaccination and may or may not have been caused by it.

She said she wasn’t looking for anything in particular in the data. “I don’t go in with questions,” she said.

What she found, however, was disturbing to her.

VAERS has been in place since 1990 to provide an early warning signal that there might be a problem with a vaccine. Anybody can submit the reports, which are then checked for duplicates. They are largely filed by health care personnel, based on previous research. Usually, there would be around 40,000 reports a year, including several hundred deaths.

But with the introduction of the COVID-19 vaccines, VAERS reports went through the roof. By Jan. 7, there were over a million reports, including more than 21,000 deaths. Other notable issues include over 11,000 heart attacks, nearly 13,000 cases of Bell’s palsy, and over 25,000 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis.

Rose found the data alarming, only to realize authorities and even some experts were generally dismissing it.

“Clearly, there’s no concern [among these authorities and experts] for people who are suffering adverse events,” she said.

The usual arguments against the VAERS data have been that it’s unverified and unreliable.

Rose, however, sees such arguments as irrelevant—VAERS was never meant to provide definitive answers, it’s meant to give early warning and, as she sees it, it’s doing just that.

“It’s emitting so many safety signals and they’re being ignored,” she said.

She teamed up with Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist, and epidemiologist, to write a paper on VAERS reports of myocarditis in youth—an issue already acknowledged as a side effect of the vaccination, though usually described as rare.

As of July 9, they found 559 VAERS reports of myocarditis, 97 among children ages 12–15. Some of them may have been related to COVID itself, which can also cause heart problems, but there were too many cases to dismiss the likelihood the vaccines were involved, according to the authors.

“Within 8 weeks of the public offering of COVID-19 products to the 12–15-year-old age group, we found 19 times the expected number of myocarditis cases in the vaccination volunteers over background myocarditis rates for this age group,” the paper said.

After two weeks, on Oct. 15, the paper disappeared from the Elsevier website, replaced by a notice of “Temporary Removal.” Not only weren’t the authors told why, they weren’t informed at all, according to Rose.

“It’s unprecedented in the eyes of all of my colleagues,” she said.

When they brought up the issue with the journal, they were first told the paper was pulled because it wasn’t “invited,” Rose said. That was shot down as irrelevant by McCullough, who threatened to sue for breach of contract. The journal then turned to its terms of use, saying it has the right to refuse any paper for any reason.

It’s still not clear why the paper was pulled. “I do apologise, but Elsevier cannot comment on this enquiry,” said Jonathan Davis, the journal’s communications officer, in an email to The Epoch Times.

In late November, the paper was replaced by a notice that the “article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor.”

“It just feels like weird censorship that isn’t really justified,” Rose said.

The paper’s conclusions are not necessarily controversial. A recent Danish study concluded, for example, an elevated risk of myocarditis for young people following the Moderna COVID vaccine.

It’s common, however, even for papers that examine potential issues with the vaccines to frame their results in a way that still endorses vaccination. “That’s what you have to say to get your work published these days,” Rose said.

Her paper did no such thing.

“As part of any risk/benefit analysis which must be completed in the context of experimental products, the points herein must be considered before a decision can be made pertaining to agreeing to 2-dose injections of these experimental COVID-19 products, especially into children and by no means, should parental consent be waived under any circumstances to avoid children volunteering for injections with products that do not have proven safety or efficacy,” the paper said.

The paper also called the vaccines “injectable biological products”—a reference to the fact that they are distinct from all other traditional vaccines.

A traditional vaccine uses “whole live or attenuated pathogens” while the COVID vaccines use “mRNA in lipid nanoparticles,” Rose explained via email. She said the lipid nanoparticles include “cationic lipids which are highly toxic.” Pfizer, the manufacturer of the most popular COVID-19 vaccine in many countries, addressed the issue by saying the dose is sufficiently low to ensure “an acceptable safety margin,” according to the European drug authority, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (pdf).

Rose also noted that the COVID-19 vaccines haven’t gone “through the 10-15 years of safety testing that vaccines have always had to go through … for obvious reasons.”

By this point, Rose is no longer a dispassionate observer. Reading through countless VAERS reports gave her a window into the hardships of those who believe they’ve been harmed by the vaccines. “I speak for all of those people,” she said.

In the past, 50 reports of deaths in VAERS would prompt authorities to hit the brakes and investigate, Rose said. In her view, that should have happened with the COVID-19 vaccines a year ago.

Not only has that not happened, but it isn’t even clear what would be enough to convince the authorities to do so.

“What’s the cut-off number for the number of deaths?” Rose asked.

The counterargument is that the vaccines save more lives than they cost. But in Rose’s view, this logic is flawed since the vaccines haven’t been around long enough and studied thoroughly enough to tell how many lives they may cost.

It is known, however, that VAERS understates adverse events following vaccination—by a factor of anywhere between 5 and as much as 100, based on some estimates.

Submitting a VAERS report takes about 30 minutes and many medical practitioners simply don’t have the time, Rose said. Some may feel that filing the report may get them labeled as “anti-vaxxers.” Some may simply not associate whatever health issue they’re facing with the vaccination. Some may not even be aware VAERS exists.

It’s unlikely that any significant number of the reports would be fraudulent, she suggested, noting it’s a federal offense to submit a false report.

Rose has now joined the ranks of dissident doctors and researchers skeptical of the official line on the vaccines and the pandemic in general. She described it as something she’s compelled to do despite the disincentives involved.

“We don’t want to be doing this. But it is our duty. Doctors swore an oath to do no harm. And researchers with integrity cannot look away from this,” she said via email.


The most vaccinated country in the world is being hit heavily by Omicron

Israel experienced its highest daily number of new Covid cases this week – 71,000 out of a population of 9 million – but the head of country’s health department, Nahman Ash, concedes the number may be up to three times higher. Whichever figure is correct, the trend is certain: case numbers have been rising every day for the past two weeks, as the Omicron wave surges.

“Ninety-eight per cent of our patients are now infected with Omicron,” says Dror Mevorach, who heads the Covid ward at ­Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem.

As the number of seriously ill patients rises, hospitals are reopening Covid wards and postponing elective surgery. Health bureaucrats and politicians hope this wave will peak before the hospital system overloads.

As a result, Israel is also adopting self-administered rapid antigen tests as its alternative testing method, and a lack of supply has led to queues and rising prices too. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett admitted this was a problem, but said it could be solved.

“We will purchase 50 million more RATs,” he said last week. The finance minister said 20 million would be enough. They appear to have sorted out that issue, as on Tuesday Mr Bennett said the first delivery was due next week. And the main policy change: 25-30 million kits will be distributed for free to certain sectors of the population.

From the start, Israel has been proactive, pioneering mass vaccinations and the third booster shot. Once it became clear that the largest numbers of vaccinated people contracting the Omicron variant were older, Israel last month initiated a fourth vaccine booster for those over 60, as well as frontline medical workers and the immuno-compromised.

As a fourth shot had not been approved by US regulatory authorities, the Sheba Medical Centre near Tel Aviv began a trial, testing its effect on its staff, who have been monitored since December 2020, when they received the first dose of the vaccine. Preliminary results released this week have found only middling results.

“The vaccine, which was very effective against the previous strains, is less effective against Omicron,” said Gili Regev-­Yochay, who is leading the trial.

“We see many who receive the fourth dose and are infected with Omicron. Granted, a bit less than in the control group, but there are still a lot of infections. The bottom line is that the vaccine was excellent against the Alpha and Delta variants, but for Omicron it’s not good enough.”

The trial, which follows 150 medical staff, is much smaller than most drug trials, where thousands of participants are tracked for months. But Dr Regev-Yochay says she released the preliminary findings because it’s the only known study of the fourth dose. She added it was still probably beneficial to give a fourth jab to people in higher risk groups including the very elderly, but hinted that perhaps it need not be given to everyone over 60.

More than 500,000 Israelis have received a fourth dose, and Dr Alroy-Preis says with hindsight it was still the right decision. “A five to six fold increase in antibodies is better than nothing and this is the most vulnerable section of the community,” she said.

Israel has also been prescribing the new Pfizer drug Paxlovid. Ruth Ralbag, head of private health fund Clalit, said the new drug was only appropriate for people in the first stages of the disease and could be taken at home. “Covid is teaching us that care at home is the future,” she said.

It seems even a proactive government finds it hard to remain popular during a pandemic. According to the latest polls, 48 per cent of Israelis, frustrated at the high infection rate and repeated quarantines, don’t think the government is doing a good job.




20 January, 2022

Expert skeptical about vaccines

Dr. Peter McCullough – a renowned cardiologist and highly published medical scientist whose confrontation of the government's COVID-19 policies has drawn more than 40 million views on Joe Rogan's podcast – told WND in a video interview Thursday night the official pandemic narrative that has been fiercely guarded by establishment media and social-media censors is "completely crumbling."

That narrative, he said, included "false statements regarding asymptomatic spread, reliance on lockdown and masks – which obviously didn't work – the suppression of early treatment, the mass promotion of vaccines that failed."

"And now here we are, almost in complete free fall," McCullough said, referring to the record number of COVID-19 cases as officials acknowledge the vaccines don't prevent infection or transmission.

McCullough noted that in California, with the more contagious but much milder omicron variant now dominant, health care workers who tested positive for COVID-19 and had symptoms were told to go back to work.

"With that, I think that's it. I think that's the end. The narrative has crumbled. People don't want these vaccines," McCullough said. "The vaccines should be pulled off the market. They clearly are not solving the problem."

The focus, he said, should be on "treating high-risk patients who develop symptoms" with some of the early treatments that he and other physicians around the world have found to be effective, including ivermectin and a new drug granted emergency use authorization by the FDA, Paxlovid.

McCullough cited a study from Denmark and data from the U.K.'s health agency showing that the vaccines have zero effectiveness against omicron.

Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

"That's not misinformation," he said. "I'm just quoting the data. All of this can be looked up. Fact-checkers can look at it. I know I'll never have any problems with allegations of misinformation, because I just quote the data."

President Biden clearly had McCullough in mind when on Thursday he urged social media companies and media outlets to "please deal with the misinformation and disinformation that's on your shows. It has to stop."

McCullough pointed out his work has been relied upon by courts across the nation, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and he has testified to the U.S. Senate and will be back there later this month.


Fourth shot of Covid vaccine is NOT enough against Omicron

Even a fourth dose of current Covid vaccines is not enough to prevent Omicron infection, according to preliminary results from a trial in Israel.

The study of more than 270 medical staff found that the fourth shot only raised antibodies 'a little' compared to those who were triple-jabbed.

And those in the four jabs group were only 'a bit less' likely to test positive for the mutant strain than the control group.

The findings were true for a fourth dose of both Pfizer and Moderna, and will reignite the debate about whether constant boosting is necessary.

Researchers from the Sheba Medical Center in Tel Aviv, who ran the trial, said those infected in the study had very mild symptoms or none at all.

Dr. Gili Regev-Yochay, the lead researcher of the trial, told a press conference: 'These are very preliminary results. This is before any publication.

'But we're giving it out since we understand the urgency of the public to get any information possible about the fourth dose.'

The findings will likely reignite the debate around how often Covid vaccine boosters are needed.

A UK Government adviser today became the latest senior figure to warn against repeated mass vaccinations, recommending a targeted approach like for flu.

And last week, European Union regulators claimed that boosting too frequently could actually weaken the immune system.

The World Health Organization has called on vaccine makers to make variant-proof jabs to avoid countries having to revaccinate every few months.

Israel was the first country in the world to roll out boosters last year and became the only nation to start dishing out fourth shots last month to combat Omicron.

Studies have since shown that three jabs are holding up well against serious illness, offering about 88 per cent protection from hospitalisation, even if Omicron can slip past the immune system and cause an infection more easily.

More than half a million people in those two risk groups have been quadruple-jabbed so far. But she admitted the small extra benefit was not enough to justify a wider rollout to the whole adult population.


Blood thinner could be used to treat and stop transmission of COVID-19

Patients at four hospitals in NSW and Victoria are set to undergo treatment with a cheap, readily available drug that scientists believe can dramatically improve outcomes for those infected with COVID-19.

Heparin is a common blood thinner that has been in use for decades. Australian National University researchers are coordinating multiple studies aiming to prove it is effective in preventing severe disease among coronavirus patients when inhaled directly into the lungs.

ANU study lead Professor Frank van Haren said initial results indicate the drug could be “a promising treatment” and also “a possible preventative against the virus” with breathing and oxygen levels improving in 70 per cent of patients after they inhaled a course of heparin.

“If it is as effective as our early results suggest, it could have a major impact in our fight against COVID,” Professor van Haren said.

Researchers around the world are tracking hospital patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in 13 countries who were given doses of inhaled heparin, which is administered through an inhaler similar to the ones used to treat asthma.

When the study began, Australia did not have enough people infected with COVID-19 to test the drug on patients here, but now trials are beginning at St George Hospital in Kogarah, the John Hunter Hospital in Newcastle, Sydney’s Royal North Shore Hospital and St Vincent’s Melbourne.

A randomised, peer reviewed study of 98 patients, to be published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology on Thursday, found heparin was safe, with no concerning side effects among patients who inhaled a therapeutic dose of the drug.

While the larger, ongoing international study would provide a “definitive” answer about the treatment’s efficacy, Professor van Haren said the new safety findings were crucial.

“It’s super important to know that the new treatment and new way of giving something is actually safe, that it doesn’t do any harm,” he said. “There is still an urgent need for an effective treatment of COVID-19.”

Co-author Professor Clive Page, from King’s College London, who is co-leading the global studies, said inhaled heparin had antiviral properties “which work by binding to the spike proteins the coronavirus uses to enter the cells of the body.”

“Inhaled heparin effectively stops the virus infecting cells in the lungs and could also stop people from getting the virus from others,” Professor Page said.

“It also works as an anti-inflammatory drug; the medicine has the ability to calm everything down when the body is mounting an exaggerated response to the virus.”

Professor van Haren said he hoped the drug’s efficacy could be proven quickly, saying it could be used widely within months if early results held up – easing the strain on hospitals by reducing the number of patients needing to be admitted to intensive care units.

“Most COVID experts agree that vaccination alone is not going to stop the pandemic. This could really assist in poorer countries where vaccination is challenging and we think it could help frontline workers who could use it as a preventative measure,” he said.

Professor van Haren said the team was now collecting more evidence that inhaled heparin worked and that “once we have this evidence, heparin via inhalation, could be an option to treat COVID-19 patients, everywhere, within months”.

Heparin, which is normally administered via injection, is a blood thinner used to treat and prevent blood clots across the world and is widely available.




19 January, 2022

Fauci warns that Omicron may NOT be the 'end' of the pandemic and there is a 'high probability' another variant could emerge' that would evade immunity

Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Disease, told the Davos Agenda virtual event Monday that 'natural vaccination' - or immunity via previous infection - might not be as effective as some believe.

Like the emergence of Omicron, there is potential for a new variant to emerge in the future that can bypass the natural immunity provided by infection from the new strain.

He says that even if Omicron - which has caused a massive surge in new cases worldwide but is not as severe or deadly as its predecessors - is the final strain of Covid, it will likely become endemic.

His warning runs counter to the positive predictions coming from some officials in the UK who believe that the virus could have a 'flu-type' relationship with people by the end of the year based on its current spread.

'I would hope that that's the case. But that would only be the case if we don't get another variant that eludes the immune response of the prior variant,' Fauci said.

Fauci has previously made grim projections about new Covid variants, and was even correct about a variant like Omicron emerging.

In August, when the Delta variant was first rising in the U.S., Fauci warned that with transmission of Covid so rampant it was likely that a vaccine resistant variant would eventually emerge.

Months later, than variant did come about, when South African health officials discovered the highly infectious Omicron variant in late November.

He fears that there is a chance another variant emerges that has mutated in a way that allows it to get around protection provided by recovering from Omicron.

Covid becoming endemic as a result of Omicron has become a common theory among health experts and officials, and has served as a beacon of hope for the population suffering through the recent surge.

Omicron is burning through people so quickly, causing daily Covid cases to hit records almost everywhere in the world, that it could soon run out of people to infect.

The U.S.'s daily case average eclipsed 800,000 for the first time over the weekend, with the height of the Omicron surge now reaching four times as many cases as the peak of the Delta wave. Disparities in case figures have not translated into more deaths, though, with the 1,839 deaths being recorded every day in America - the most since early October - is still far below the 3,200 deaths per day being averaged at the peak of the Delta surge in late September.

Cases also seem to be reaching a peak. Week-to-week case growth nationwide is slowing. New daily cases are only up seven percent over the past week, compared to a 75 percent increase the week before. New York and New Jersey were struck hard and fast by the variant last month, but cases in the neighboring states are now decreasing over the past two weeks - down 14 percent and 20 percent respectively.

Dr Vivek Murthy, America's surgeon general, warns that the peak may not be as near as some believe. He told CNN on Sunday that not every state will experience was is currently going on along the east coast.

'There are parts of the country -- New York, in particular, and other parts of the Northeast -- where we are starting to see a plateau, and in some cases, an early decline in cases,' Murthy said.

'The challenge is that the entire country is not moving at the same pace,'

'The Omicron wave started later in other parts of the country, so we shouldn't expect a national peak in the next coming days. The next few weeks will be tough.'

New Jersey, once among the leader in infection rate, is now seeing cases decline - signaling this surge is coming to an end.

Its neighbor, New York, and Maryland - which is experiencing a seven percent decline in daily cases - are also among the only three states in America where cases are going down.

The rate of case growth in state where cases are increasing is starting to slow, though. Last week, almost every state in America was recording a two-week doubling of cases. As of Monday morning, only 35 states have logged an increase of more than 100 percent in the past 14 days.

Some states that were once hotspots look like they could soon join the ranks of states posting decreasing cases. Georgia was once one of the hardest hit states in America by the recent Omicron surge, mainly fueled by an outbreak in the Atlanta area. The Peach state has seen a rapid decline in growth, though, with cases only up 34 percent over the past two weeks.

Neighboring Florida has quickly dropped off the leaderboard of states with the highest case growth, with the Sunshine state logging a 35 percent increase in cases over the past two weeks. Florida numbers can sometimes be misleading, though, due to the inconsistent nature of case reporting in the state.


French parliament approves law that will exclude unvaccinated people from all restaurants, sports areas, tourist sites and even trains

The French parliament has approved a law that will exclude unvaccinated people from all restaurants, sports areas, tourist sites and even trains.

President Emmanuel Macron has faced criticism that the new vaccine pass is overkill and will do little to slow hospitalisations because 91 per cent of the population are already jabbed against Covid-19.

Up until now, a Covid-19 pass has been required in France to go to most public sites throughout the country, but unvaccinated people have been allowed in if they show a recent negative test or proof of recent recovery.

But the new law, which applies to everyone aged 16 and over, requires full vaccination and removes the test option, effectively barring unvaccinated people from such venues.

Some exceptions could be made for those who have recently recovered from Covid-19 but the law, set to come into force by the end of the week, also imposes tougher fines for fake passes and allows ID checks to avoid fraud.

It is the central measure of government efforts to protect hospitals amid record numbers of Covid infections driven by the highly contagious Omicron variant.

The plans have faced fierce resistance from anti-vaccination campaigners and far-right and far-left groups, but was backed by the government which has a majority in parliament.

Macron's government is hoping the new pass will be enough to limit the number of patients filling up strained hospitals nationwide without resorting to a new lockdown.

New confinement measures would strike another blow to the economy, and could also cloud Macron's chances of re-election in the April 10 presidential vote.

More than 76 per cent of French ICU beds are occupied by coronavirus patients, most of them unvaccinated, and some 200 people with the virus are dying every day.

Like many countries, France is in the grip of an Omicron wave, recording more than 2,800 positive cases per 100,000 people over the past week.

The National Assembly adopted the law by a vote of 215-58. Macron, 44, had hoped to push the Bill through faster, but it was slightly delayed due to resistance from politicians both on the right and left and hundreds of proposed amendments.

Far-right leader Marine le Pen wrote on Twitter yesterday that, if elected, she would 'remove this useful and draconian measure', in reference to the new legislation.

Left wing politician François Ruffin said the vaccine pass made unvaccinated people 'second class citizens' and asked 'what have you done with our souls?'

Christophe Castaner, a member of Macron's La Republic en Marche party, rebutted Ruffin, saying 'the fight you are leading is already lost', citing a recent increase in vaccine uptake.

The new law comes after Macron said earlier this month he wanted to 'p*** off' unvaccinated people by making their lives so complicated they would end up getting jabbed.

He made the cutting remark while responding to a nurse during a question and answer session with readers of Le Parisien on how the government will handle non-vaccinated people.

'By – and I’m sorry for putting it this way – by p***ing them off even more,' Macron said.

'I’m generally opposed to the French being p****d off. I complain all the time about administrative blockages. But when it comes to the non-vaccinated, I’m very keen to pi** them off. So we’re going to do it, the end. That’s our strategy.'

The phrase prompted howls of condemnation from rivals and forced parliament to suspend a debate on a Covid bill on January 5 as opposition lawmakers demanded explanations from Macron.

But the government backed Macron. 'Who is pissing off who today?', government spokesperson Gabrial Attal said, quoting health workers struggling to cope or businesses hurt by the pandemic. 'It's those who refuse the vaccine.'

'A president cannot say such things,' Christian Jacob, chair of the conservative Les Republicans party, told parliament on January 5 as it discussed the new legislation.

'I'm in favour of the vaccine pass but I cannot back a text whose objective is to 'p*** off' the French,' Jacob said. 'Is that your objective, yes or no? We cannot keep debating without having a clear answer on that.'

'A president shouldn't say that,' Le Pen responded on Twitter. 'Emmanuel Macron is unworthy of his office.'

In the Le Parisien interview, Macron, who has consistently called on everyone in France to get vaccinated, also called unvaccinated people irresponsible and - in another remark criticised by some voters and the opposition, that 'irresponsible people are no longer citizens'.

He said he aims to irritate the unvaccinated into submission, rather than round them up and prosecute them.




18 January, 2022

Doctor treated as insane and dangerous for questioning conventional Covid treatment

She treated Covid-19 patients with Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine

A doctor with decades of experience can’t practice medicine after her license was temporarily suspended over complaints that she shared coronavirus misinformation, according to a Maine licensing board.

The board has ordered her to undergo a neuropsychological evaluation, it said.

Dr. Meryl J. Nass, who got a license to practice medicine in Maine in 1997, had her license “immediately” suspended for 30 days after a board investigation and review of complaints against her on Jan. 12, according to a suspension order from the Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine.

Nass, who’s an internist in Ellsworth, must “submit” to an evaluation by a “Board-selected psychologist” on Feb. 1, the board’s evaluation order issued Jan. 11 said.

“I have no comment about submitting to a neuropsych exam, except that the board ordered me to do so on shaky grounds,” Nass told McClatchy News, adding that she’s had her license for a total of 41 years.

“The information received by the Board demonstrates that Dr. Nass is or may be unable to practice medicine with reasonable skill and safety to her patients by reason of mental illness, alcohol intemperance, excessive use of drugs, narcotics, or as a result of a mental or physical condition interfering with the competent practice of medicine,” the evaluation order states.

The complaints against Nass include how the board was told she engaged in “public dissemination of ‘misinformation’” about COVID-19 and vaccinations “via a video interview and on her website,” the board said about the October 26, 2021 complaint. It lists several comments Nass made that were subject to the board’s investigation.

Roughly 10 days later, the board got another complaint about Nass “spreading COVID and COVID vaccination misinformation on Twitter,” it said.

Nass called “disinformation and misinformation” a “fuzzy concept” that the board hasn’t defined for her, she said. “There’s no law that says doctors can’t express their educated opinion on any subject.”

Other grounds for her suspension include how Nass treated COVID-19 patients with Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, according to the board.

The board noted that Ivermectin isn’t Food and Drug Administration “authorized or approved” as a treatment for COVID-19 in the suspension order.

Ivermectin is used as a parasitic treatment for animals, according to the FDA.

“For humans, ivermectin tablets are approved at very specific doses to treat some parasitic worms, and there are topical (on the skin) formulations for head lice and skin conditions like rosacea,” the agency explains online.

Additionally, it noted the FDA “revoked’ emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine since it “may not be effective” against COVID-19.

Hydroxychloroquine is FDA approved for malaria and certain autoimmune conditions.

On Dec. 19, a physician notified the board that Nass diagnosed a sick, unvaccinated patient “‘over the phone’” with COVID and prescribed 5 days of Ivermectin,” the board said. This patient had to be hospitalized for COVID-19.

With another patient, Nass is accused of emailing the board about another COVID-19 patient saying she was “forced” to “provide misinformation” in order to obtain hydroxychloroquine.

The board said Nass told them during a Zoom meeting that she “lied and said the patient had Lyme disease and so the pharmacist dispensed the medication only because I lied.”

On Dec. 31, a Certified Nurse Midwife reported that Nass prescribed one of her pregnant patients who tested COVID-19 positive with hydroxychloroquine earlier in 2021, according to the board.

Nass said she believes vaccines are “preventive, but they don’t work anymore against the omicron variant.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert, says otherwise.

Omicron “will ultimately find just about everybody” Fauci said on Jan. 11, CNN reported. But those who are vaccinated and boosted “will very likely, with some exceptions, do reasonably well in the sense of not having hospitalization and death.”

Unvaccinated individuals are “going to get the brunt of the severe aspect of this,” Fauci said

On her blog, Nass called her license suspension a “witchhunt.”

Nass’ license is suspended until Feb. 11 “pending further Board action at an adjudicatory hearing,” the suspension order said.

She said that this hearing can be “extended by either party.”

Because of her suspension, her practice in Ellsworth was shut down where she said she takes care of chronically ill patients as well as COVID-19 patients. Ellsworth is located about 100 miles east of Augusta.

The board said that her continuing to practice as a physician “constitutes an immediate jeopardy to the health and physical safety of the public who might receive her medical services, and that it is necessary to immediately suspend her ability to practice medicine in order to adequately respond to this risk.”


Liberal State Allows COVID-Positive Health Care Workers to STAY AT WORK

Of all of the asinine ways in which we’ve spent the last two years trying to control the coronavirus crisis, and with the gamut of precautions that we’ve had to fight through just to live our normal lives, you would think that the powers that be wouldn’t be quick to just flips a switch and turn it all off.

No, they’ve spent months attempting to convince us of all manner of doom headed our way, lest we choose not to abide by their ever-changing sets of rules.

As the omicron variant surges, however, some of the nation’s most liberal locales are now throwing all caution to the wind, and in an alarming manner.

Daylong waits in the emergency room. No one to answer the phones. No one to take out the trash. And more patients arriving each day.

That’s the scene playing out at some hospitals across Southern California as the Omicron-fueled surge of COVID-19 contributes to a crippling shortage of doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers. While Omicron is causing significantly fewer serious illnesses than last year’s winter surge, the unprecedented number of people becoming infected has left the medical infrastructure on edge.

So what’s their brilliant plan?

State officials are attempting to address California’s staffing shortage through a sweeping policy change that allows asymptomatic healthcare workers who have tested positive for the coronavirus to return to work immediately. The policy, set to remain in place through Feb. 1, is designed to keep many healthcare workers on the job at a time when hospitals are expecting more patients.

Some experts say California’s stance is an unorthodox yet necessary solution to a difficult problem. Yet many healthcare workers and community members say the policy is not only ill-advised, it’s potentially dangerous.

And why wouldn’t they be upset? This new guidance seems to fly in the face of just about every bit of advice we’ve received previous to now.

Leave it to California…


SCOTUS to the rescue

Medical experts are saying it’s time for the Biden administration to rethink its failing COVID policy. By the end of the week, another Quinnipiac University presidential performance poll was released. Biden’s approval numbers continue to plummet.

To cement his “week from hell”, Biden watched as the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his tyrannical attempt to federally mandate vaccines on businesses across the country. It was one of the most ill-advised attempts at government health control ever.

SCOTUS clearly felt the same way. Biden insisted that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) had the right to force workers at businesses with more than 100 employees to require a COVID-19 vaccine. He was wrong, as usual.

Some experts weighed in on the decision. They insisted that the agency was overstepping its bounds. However, OSHA didn’t propose the mandate. The order to force an experimental drug on workers across the nation came from Joe Biden. OSHA was a pawn.

It is one of the most egregious power grabs in the history of American government. Thousands of Americans have already quit their jobs for fear the order would be upheld. Hopefully, these people will get their jobs back or seek legal relief in the courts.

More than 80 million Americans would have been affected by this unconstitutional decree. By blocking the mandate in a 6 to 3 vote, SCOTUS issued a scathing condemnation of Biden’s attempt to forcibly exercise unnecessary government control over citizens’ lives.

In a statement released by Biden, he insisted he was “disappointed”. Not nearly as disappointed as the thousands of Americans he has forced or would have forced out of a job. Biden also bemoaned that his mandate was “grounded squarely in both science and law.”

As we watch millions of vaccinated Americans get infected with the Omicron COVID-19 variant, that’s a complete lie. The U.S. Supreme Court slammed the door shut on Biden’s other falsehood. His dictatorial mandate was not grounded squarely in the law. It was unconstitutional.

If Americans do not elect a common sense counterbalance to Biden’s liberal socialist insanity, we will lose our democracy. It will be challenging three years for certain. However, the alternative will be unthinkable. We will not recognize our country otherwise.

A strong conservative-led counterbalance in both Houses of Congress will freeze Joe Biden’s liberal assault on democracy. Soon after he fumbles his way out of the White House, he will begin his own legacy; a legacy as the worst president in the history of this great nation.


Pediatric Neurologist Dr. Ben Carson On Kids' COVID Vax: 'Just a Giant Experiment' - 'Doesn't Make Sense'

Pediatric neurologist Dr. Ben Carson appeared on Fox Businesses and told host Maria Bartiromo that the COVID vaccine for 5-11 year olds does not make sense, and described it as a "giant experiment."

Bartiromo asked Carson if he agrees with the CDC decision to vaccinate kids for COVID and he replied, “Uh, absolutely not!"

He continued, "The fact of the matter is, the mortality rate for children from COVID-19 is .025 which is very similar to the rate for seasonal flu—and we haven’t been going through these things for seasonal flu!”

“This is really just a giant experiment,” Carson said. “Do we want to put our children at risk when we don’t know why would we do a thing like that?” adding, “It makes no sense whatsoever.”

He declared that natural immunity “is very very effective,” including a “study by the Cleveland Clinic of 1,300 of their workers who had been previously infected, and NONE of them have been re-infected!”

Carson noted that the vaccine push is nothing more than a money grab. (Video at link)




17 January, 2020

Vaccines Not Durable, Omicron Might Turn COVID-19 Endemic

Bill Gates, in a Twitter discussion Tuesday, said that the current COVID-19 vaccines were missing two key factors, and claimed that Omicron might bring about a wave of immunity in communities it passes through.

Microsoft co-founder and one of the world’s richest men, Gates has invested in vaccine research through his foundation and given prominent talks regarding the pandemic. Recently, he chatted regarding the current situation of COVID-19, vaccines, and related issues with Devi Sridhar, a professor at the University of Edinburgh where she holds a Personal Chair in Global Public Health.

When asked about a breakthrough that could result in the biggest difference in ending the pandemic, he talked about the efficacy of vaccines.

“The vaccines we have prevent severe disease and death very well but they are missing two key things. First they still allow infections (‘breakthrough’) and the duration appears to be limited. We need vaccines that prevent re-infection and have many years of duration,” Gates said.

The effectiveness of vaccines has been questioned, especially with regards to the Omicron variant. The high number of mutations on the variant’s spike protein increases “the possibility of immune escape,” according to Moderna President Stephen Hoge. Hoge added that the “dent in our vaccine’s efficacy” applies to all manufacturers.

Omicron has spread rapidly across the world, with 98.3 percent of infections in the United States now attributed to it. Although highly transmissible, international studies have shown that the strain poses milder symptoms in infected people.

Recently, a notable international health charity called for treating COVID-19 “like the common cold.” Dr. Mike Tildesley, a University of Warwick professor, has forecast COVID-19 evolving to become less severe and endemic. He said the Omicron variant is the beginning of that process. Gates has seconded this perspective.

“Once Omicron goes through a country then the rest of the year should see far fewer cases so COVID can be treated more like seasonal flu,” he said, while recommending yearly COVID-19 shots that would be needed for some time.

Gates talked about a lot of “misinformation” regarding him spreading on social media. “People like you and I and Tony Fauci have been subject to a lot of misinformation. I didn’t expect that. Some of it like me putting chips in arms doesn’t make sense to me—why would I want to do that?”

The billionaire then discussed the availability of vaccines around the world. Although there was demand, logistical issues and inefficient health systems prevented the adequate supply of vaccines in developing nations.

Regarding the Chinese authorities’ theory that the coronavirus emerged from a bat in a wet market located in Wuhan, Gates defended this argument. This is despite mounting evidence suggesting that the novel coronavirus, otherwise known as the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus escaped from a government lab in the Chinese city.

When Sridhar asked about the origin of the pandemic, Gates replied, “The data is pretty strong that it came from another species which is true for most pandemics. People will continue to speculate on this and we should make sure labs are careful. There will be future outbreaks coming from other species so we need to invest in being ready.”


Virginia’s New GOP Governor Ends Vaccine Mandate for State Employees, Mask Mandates in Schools

Glenn Youngkin, the first Republican to win the state of Virginia since 2009, was sworn in as the state’s 74th governor on Jan. 15.

Within hours of his inauguration, he signed 11 executive actions including lifting the mask mandate in Virginia schools and “ending divisive concepts, including critical race theory, in public education.”

He also signed an executive directive rescinding the vaccine mandate for all state employees.

The 55-year-old former business executive, in his inauguration speech at Richmond, emphasized a “common path forward” with “our deep and abiding respect for individual freedom.” Youngkin vowed to strengthen and renew the “spirit of Virginia” associated with the history of the state as the home of American democracy. He credited Virginians with the spirit of tenacity, grit, and resilience.

Youngkin said he was “ready to lead and serve, starting on day one,” and it would start in the classroom to get Virginia’s children “career and college ready.” The crowd of an estimated size of 6,000 burst into a loud cheer upon hearing from Youngkin that he would “remove politics from the classroom.”

“Virginia is open for business,” Youngkin promised to create 400,000 new jobs and 10,000 new startups in the four years of his administration by reducing regulations and increasing job-related training.

According to him, residents of the commonwealth will see the “largest tax rebate in Virginia’s history.” In addition, he promised to “fully fund” and “return respect to” law enforcement.




16 January, 2022

Covid-19 testing in the time of omicron

With omicron infections surging around the world, many countries are changing their coronavirus testing guidelines to better deal with the new variant and the huge number of cases it is causing. Here's what you need to know

Can you test positive for covid-19 without being infectious?
Even if you have had three doses of coronavirus vaccine, a positive lateral flow test (LFT) result means you are infectious to other people because virus protein is present in large quantities in your nose or throat. For that, the virus must be actively multiplying inside your cells.

However, PCR tests continue to give positive results for days to weeks after an infection, because they can detect tiny quantities of the virus’s genetic material, which aren’t necessarily infectious.

How have testing rules changed?

Many countries have lessened their restrictions for people with covid-19 since the start of the surge caused by the omicron variant. In the UK, the isolation period for infected people has been cut from 10 days to seven – as long as you get a negative result on two LFTs, also known as rapid antigen tests. These must be done on days six and seven, and carried out at least 24 hours apart. People should remain cautious around others and avoid those who are vulnerable, though.

Could the isolation period be shortened further?
In the US, the isolation period has been cut to five days for people who have no symptoms or whose symptoms are on the wane, although you should still wear a mask around other people for a further five days. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) says it has no plans to follow suit.

Why do some people still test positive on day seven even though they feel well?

Symptoms may not reflect how much virus is present in a person’s throat or nose – they could have replicating virus but no symptoms and vice versa. “There’s huge variation in the length of infection, and huge variations in viral load,” says Al Edwards at the University of Reading, UK.

The UKHSA estimates that between 10 and 30 per cent of people will still be positive at day six – and that 5 per cent of people will still be positive at day 10, although the guidance says you no longer have to isolate on day 11, no matter what your LFT results show.

How about confirmatory PCR tests?

In the UK, people who test positive by LFT will no longer need to take a follow-up PCR test, a temporary change coming into effect on 11 January. This is because background levels of covid-19 are so high – with about 1 in 15 people infected in the last week of December – that a positive LFT result is currently less likely to be false.

Does this mean we can just rely on LFTs now?
No. Anyone in the UK with covid-19 symptoms but a negative LFT result must still take a PCR test to rule out an infection, because LFTs have too high a rate of false negatives – telling someone they are covid-19 free when they really are infected – to rely on them if you have symptoms. There are several reasons why LFTs are prone to false negatives, including people failing to swab their nose or throat properly and failing to mix the swab well with the testing fluid, says Edwards. “LFTs are only able to detect large amounts of virus.”

Are false negatives more likely with omicron?

Opinions differ. The UKHSA says initial investigations suggest that LFTs are as sensitive to omicron as they are to the delta variant that was predominant in most countries until December, although it is continuing further tests. But the US Food and Drug Administration has said LFTs may be less sensitive at detecting omicron.

It is possible that LFTs that only involve swabbing the nose may be more likely to give false negative results for omicron, because some studies have suggested that this variant is more likely to reach high levels in saliva before it does in nasal mucus. One very small US study put online last week suggests that in omicron infections, virus levels peaked in saliva one or two days before they did in nasal mucus, although this analysis included only five people.

“Omicron might be exacerbating that differential, where you have your throat and your salivary specimens turning positive earlier,” says Michael Mina at US testing company eMed. A study from South Africa also found that saliva swabs were generally more sensitive than nasal swabs for omicron, whereas it is the opposite pattern for the delta variant.

Should we switch to using throat swabs over nasal swabs?
Opinions differ there too. In the UK, LFTs made by Innova instruct users to take throat and nasal swabs, while others only use nasal swabs. In the US, only nasal LFTs are available, so people are less used to taking throat swabs. “If at all possible, put your swab in both your throat and nasal cavities,” Deenan Pillay at University College London said at last week’s meeting of Independent SAGE, an independent group of scientists in the UK. “If the swabs are shorter, stick your fingers in more to get to the back of the throat.”

But Edwards says people should only use tests exactly as instructed. “If you change the way you use a test, it doesn’t meet the manufacturer’s requirements. [Lower levels in the nose] are probably not going to make that much difference to how accurate the tests are. Most people will be either not infected or will have tons of virus. We should stick to doing tests the proper way.”


Repeat COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Shots Trigger Regulator Warning About Immune-System Risks

The EU’s drug regulator has expressed doubts about whether a second booster dose of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines would be a sustainable long-term approach.

“There is an emergency discussion around the possibility of giving a second booster dose with the same vaccine currently in use. Data has not yet been generated to support this approach,” Marco Cavaleri, the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) head of vaccines strategy, told a media briefing.

He added later, “We would like to see this data before we can make any recommendation, but at the same time we are rather concerned about a strategy that [involves] repeated vaccinations within a short term.”

An additional vaccine booster shot “could be considered as part of a contingency plan,” but “repeated vaccinations within short intervals will not represent a sustainable long term strategy,” according to Cavaleri.

Concerns Over Immune Response

When asked to expand on his statements, Cavaleri said that for a hypothetical approach of giving vaccine booster shots frequently, such as every four months, “we will end up potentially having problems with immune response and immune response may end up not being as good as we would like it to be, so we should be careful in not overloading the immune system with repeated immunization.”

He also noted that continuous administration of boosters can also lead to fatigue in the population.

“It will be much better to start thinking about an administration of boosters that is more spaced in time,” Cavaleri said.

The EMA is in conversation with vaccine developers in case there’s a need to update the current vaccines, according to Cavaleri. But he said any change “would have to be coordinated globally.”

More data on the effect of the Omicron coronavirus variant on vaccines and a better understanding of the evolution of the current wave are needed to decide whether an Omicron-specific vaccine was needed.

“While a monovalent Omicron vaccine would represent an obvious candidate to be investigated, other options such as a multivalent vaccine cannot be ruled out as potential alternatives,” Cavaleri said.

A Strategy to ‘Anticipate the Next Move’

“It is important that there is a good discussion around the choice of the composition of the vaccine to make sure that we have a strategy that is not just reactive after the virus changes, but try to anticipate what could be the next move and try to come up with an approach that will be suitable in order to prevent a future variant that, in any case, will emerge,” Cavaleri said.

The EMA has called for a meeting with global regulators on Jan. 12, which will include officials from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“Tomorrow we will be looking at all the evidence that we have so far with the current vaccine, so the extent by which they are still providing vaccine effectiveness and whether indeed we should still think that giving a booster shot at this point in time is the best strategy,” Cavaleri said.

He noted that the World Health Organization “will play a critical role” in decision-making.

Cavaleri noted that the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19, “is still behaving as a pandemic virus, and the Omicron emergency is currently showing that.”

“So we should not forget we are still in a pandemic,” he said. “Nevertheless, with increase of immunity in the population and with Omicron there will be a lot of natural immunity taking place on top of vaccination, we will be vastly moving toward a scenario that will be closer to endemicity.”

Separately, he noted, “Ideally, if you want to move toward a scenario of endemicity, then such boosters should be synchronized with the arrival of the cold seasons in each of the hemispheres, similarly to what we’re doing with influenza vaccines.”


Anti-viral chewing gum?

University of Pennsylvania scientists used saliva samples of COVID-19 patients to test a chewing gum laced with a plant-grown protein.

The protein traps the SARS-CoV-2 virus to reduce viral load in saliva and potentially hamper transmission.

According to the team of researchers, the chewing gum contains the ACE2 protein to neutralize the virus.

EurekAlert! noted:

The work, led by Henry Daniell at Penn’s School of Dental Medicine and performed in collaboration with scientists at the Perelman School of Medicine and School of Veterinary Medicine, as well as at The Wistar Institute and Fraunhofer USA, could lead to a low-cost tool in the arsenal against the COVID-19 pandemic. Their study was published in the journal Molecular Therapy.

“SARS-CoV-2 replicates in the salivary glands, and we know that when someone who is infected sneezes, coughs, or speaks some of that virus can be expelled and reach others,” says Daniell. “This gum offers an opportunity to neutralize the virus in the saliva, giving us a simple way to possibly cut down on a source of disease transmission.”

Since the experimental COVID-19 injections don’t prevent transmission, Daniell’s work provides an innovative solution to potentially reduce viral load.

Recent research indicates vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals can carry similar viral loads.

EurekAlert! explained how the scientists tested the chewing gum:

To test the chewing gum, the team grew ACE2 in plants, paired with another compound that enables the protein to cross mucosal barriers and facilitates binding, and incorporated the resulting plant material into cinnamon-flavored gum tablets. Incubating samples obtained from nasopharyngeal swabs from COVID-positive patients with the gum, they showed that the ACE2 present could neutralize SARS-CoV-2 viruses.

Those initial investigations were followed by others at The Wistar Institute and Penn Vet, in which viruses, less-pathogenic than SARS-CoV-2, were modified to express the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The scientists observed that the gum largely prevented the viruses or viral particles from entering cells, either by blocking the ACE2 receptor on the cells or by binding directly to the spike protein.

Finally, the team exposed saliva samples from COVID-19 patients to the ACE2 gum and found that levels of viral RNA fell so dramatically to be almost undetectable.

After the positive findings, the researchers have sought permission to conduct a clinical trial with COVID-19 positive patients.

The research remains in the beginning stages, but clinical trials proving the gum is safe and effective can potentially be a game-changer to prevent transmission.

The peer-reviewed study was published in the journal Molecular Therapy.




14 January, 2022

Cannabis compounds can stop the virus that causes COVID-19 from entering human cells by binding to the spike protein and blocking it from infecting people, study finds

This will be a great excuse for potheads

The compounds are found in hemp and can be taken orally or combine with the coronavirus vaccine

Researchers at Oregon State University identified a pair of cannabinoid acids that bind to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, blocking a critical step in the process the virus uses to infect people.

The team found the cannabis compounds, which can be taken orally and are abundantly found in hemp, blocked the alpha and beta variants from infecting the human cells - but the team notes those are the only two variants studied in this research.

This means, according to the team, the compounds could prove successfully in blocking other coronavirus strains.

Richard van Breemen, a researcher with Oregon State's Global Hemp Innovation Center and study lead, said in a statement: 'These cannabinoid acids are abundant in hemp and in many hemp extracts.

'They are not controlled substances like THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, and have a good safety profile in humans.

'And our research showed the hemp compounds were equally effective against variants of SARS-CoV-2, including variant B.1.1.7, which was first detected in the United Kingdom, and variant B.1.351, first detected in South Africa.'

The specific compounds are cannabigerolic acid, or CBGA, and cannabidiolic acid, CBDA, and the spike protein is the same drug target used in COVID-19 vaccines and antibody therapy.

SARS-CoV-2, which is characterized by crown-like protrusions on its outer surface, features RNA strands that encode its four main structural proteins – spike, envelope, membrane and nucleocapsid – as well as 16 nonstructural proteins and several 'accessory' proteins, van Breemen said.

'Any part of the infection and replication cycle is a potential target for antiviral intervention, and the connection of the spike protein's receptor binding domain to the human cell surface receptor ACE2 is a critical step in that cycle,' he said.

'That means cell entry inhibitors, like the acids from hemp, could be used to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and also to shorten infections by preventing virus particles from infecting human cells.

'They bind to the spike proteins so those proteins can't bind to the ACE2 enzyme, which is abundant on the outer membrane of endothelial cells in the lungs and other organs.'

And using compounds to block virus-receptor interaction is nothing new: it has been used to treat HIV-1 and hepatitis.

'One of the primary concerns in the pandemic is the spread of variants, of which there are many, and B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 are among the most widespread and concerning,' said van Breeman.

'These variants are well known for evading antibodies against early lineage SARS-CoV-2, which is obviously concerning given that current vaccination strategies rely on the early lineage spike protein as an antigen.

'Our data show CBDA and CBGA are effective against the two variants we looked at, and we hope that trend will extend to other existing and future variants.'


Covid loses 90% of ability to infect within minutes in air – study

Coronavirus loses 90% of its ability to infect us within 20 minutes of becoming airborne – with most of the loss occurring within the first five minutes, the world’s first simulations of how the virus survives in exhaled air suggest.

The findings re-emphasise the importance of short-range Covid transmission, with physical distancing and mask-wearing likely to be the most effective means of preventing infection. Ventilation, though still worthwhile, is likely to have a lesser impact.

“People have been focused on poorly ventilated spaces and thinking about airborne transmission over metres or across a room. I’m not saying that doesn’t happen, but I think still the greatest risk of exposure is when you’re close to someone,” said Prof Jonathan Reid, director of the University of Bristol’s Aerosol Research Centre and the study’s lead author.

“When you move further away, not only is the aerosol diluted down, there’s also less infectious virus because the virus has lost infectivity [as a result of time].”

Until now, our assumptions about how long the virus survives in tiny airborne droplets have been based on studies that involved spraying virus into sealed vessels called Goldberg drums, which rotate to keep the droplets airborne. Using this method, US researchers found that infectious virus could still be detected after three hours. Yet such experiments do not accurately replicate what happens when we cough or breathe.

Instead, researchers from the University of Bristol developed apparatus that allowed them to generate any number of tiny, virus-containing particles and gently levitate them between two electric rings for anywhere between five seconds to 20 minutes, while tightly controlling the temperature, humidity and UV light intensity of their surroundings. “This is the first time anyone has been able to actually simulate what happens to the aerosol during the exhalation process,” Reid said.

The study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, suggested that as the viral particles leave the relatively moist and carbon dioxide-rich conditions of the lungs, they rapidly lose water and dry out, while the transition to lower levels of carbon dioxide is associated with a rapid increase in pH. Both of these factors disrupt the virus’s ability to infect human cells, but the speed at which the particles dry out varies according to the relative humidity of the surrounding air.

When this was lower than 50% – similar to the relatively dry air found in many offices – the virus had lost around half of its infectivity within five seconds, after which the decline was slower and more steady, with a further 19% loss over the next five minutes. At 90% humidity – roughly equivalent to a steam or shower room – the decline in infectivity was more gradual, with 52% of particles remaining infectious after five minutes, dropping to about 10% after 20 minutes, after which these was no difference between the two conditions.

However, the temperature of the air made no difference to viral infectivity, contradicting the widely held belief that viral transmission is lower at high temperatures.

“It means that if I’m meeting friends for lunch in a pub today, the primary [risk] is likely to be me transmitting it to my friends, or my friends transmitting it to me, rather than it being transmitted from someone on the other side of the room,” said Reid. This highlights the importance of wearing a mask in situations where people cannot physically distance, he added.

The findings support what epidemiologists have been observing on the ground, said Dr Julian Tang, a clinical virologist at the University of Leicester, adding that “masks are very effective … as well as social distancing. Improved ventilation will also help – particularly if this is close to the source.”

Dr Stephen Griffin, associate professor of virology at the University of Leeds, emphasised the importance of ventilation, saying: “Aerosols will fill up indoor spaces rapidly in the absence of proper ventilation, so assuming the infected individual remains within the room, the levels of virus will be replenished.”

The same effects were seen across all three Sars-CoV-2 variants the team has tested so far, including Alpha. They hopes to start experiments with the Omicron variant in the coming weeks.


Obesity a big virus risk

The worst global health crisis in over 100 years has revealed many disturbing truths. Some, such as long-held beliefs surrounding the inherent corruption in big government and the liberal mainstream media, have been further substantiated.

However, a worldwide health crisis has a way of exposing other problems that most ignore. Since the very beginning of the pandemic, health experts have insisted that a particular segment of the population was far more at risk for serious illness from COVID-19.

When counting hospitalization rates from COVID-19, obese patients were dwarfing the number of otherwise physically healthy patients. Being excessively overweight was an obvious co-morbidity for serious COVID consequences.

Nevertheless, it has been all but ignored. No one wants to talk about how susceptible obese people are to being infected with COVID-19, and then requiring intense hospitalization. The factual statistics are astonishing.

One group of patients are at an even greater risk of serious illness from COVID-19 if they’re obese. A study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) shows that 66 percent of children over the age of 12 who are hospitalized classify as obese.

This is an astonishingly high number. However, when looking at the overall health statistics for the United States, no one should be surprised. We are, in fact, one of the least healthy nations in the world. Nearly three out of four people in the U.S. classify as overweight or obese.

Close to a quarter of children between 12 and 19 years of age meet the criteria for obese. These statistics are unacceptable. Medical experts have long warned of the tremendous health problem that obesity poses.

A raging virus, which leaked from a virology lab in Wuhan, China, has further exposed a stark reality. The United States of America, especially children, are grossly overweight. However, corrupt mainstream media outlets never discuss the obvious.

All they ever talk about is how the “unvaccinated” are putting everyone else at risk. This is not true. Corrupt politicians and their parrots in the mainstream media are broadcasting a lie. They are ignoring the facts.

Instead of pushing for more people to succumb to an experimental drug, we should be talking about improving our health. Never a word mentioned about this during prime-time news reports. Nevertheless, commercial breaks are still plastered with advertisements for fast food chains.

Healthy lifestyle choices are rarely discussed. The CDC study used a control group of children between the ages of 12 and 17-years-old. This study targeted six hospitals across six states. Two of the states, Texas and Florida, have lower rates of adolescent obesity compared with the national average.

However, collectively, the data showed more than two-thirds of the COVID hospitalization records for this age group were obese. These same children were reported to have one or more underlying conditions as well.

The length of the hospital stay for the 66 percent classifying as obese was twice that of otherwise healthy children. Obesity accounted for twice as many extended hospitalizations as respiratory ailments, such as asthma, did.

A respiratory virus affected double the number of children who were obese, as opposed to those who already struggled with respiratory challenges. Underlying medical conditions are clearly far more susceptible to serious illness from COVID-19 than otherwise healthy people.

The numbers correlate across all age groups, but are especially prevalent in children. In addition, co-morbidity is a huge contributor to more serious illness. Over 75 percent of the COVID-19 related deaths had at least four.

Corrupt government bureaucrats and the mainstream media refuse to talk about the “real science”. COVID-19 is a deadly virus. However, it targets individuals who are more susceptible. The virus is especially harsh on people who are obese.

Our medical experts should be focused on helping Americans to appreciate the benefits of good health. Instead of forcing otherwise healthy individuals to “comply”, we need to impress the importance of good health, beginning with our children.

Instead of demonizing individuals who do not choose to subject their bodies to an experimental medicine, target the people who are overwhelming the hospitals. Those who choose to be unhealthy and obese are the problem.




13 January, 2022

Pfizer boss says two doses provide ‘limited protection, if any’ against Omicron

Albert Bourla made the comments in an interview with Yahoo Finance after the company announced a new Omicron-specific version of the vaccine would be ready by March, with doses already being manufactured.

“We know that the two doses of the vaccine offer very limited protection, if any,” Dr Bourla said.

“The three doses with a booster, they offer reasonable protection against hospitalisation and deaths – against deaths, I think, very good, and less protection against infection. Now we are working on a new version of our vaccine, the 1.1, let me put it that way, that will cover Omicron as well. Of course we are waiting to have the final results, [but] the vaccine will be ready in March.”

In a separate interview with CNBC, Dr Bourla said Pfizer’s new vaccine would also target other variants currently circulating.

“The hope is that we will achieve something that will have way, way better protection particularly against infections,” he said.

“Because the protection against the hospitalisations and the severe disease – it is reasonable right now, with the current vaccines as long as you having, let’s say, the third dose.”

He added that it also remains unclear whether a fourth shot will become necessary, with Pfizer set to conduct experiments on the issue.

Omicron, which first emerged in southern Africa in November, quickly swept the world, overtaking Delta to become the most dominant strain and casting concern over the efficacy of existing vaccines.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines – both of which have been distributed in Australia – are only about 10 per cent effective at preventing symptomatic infection from Omicron 20 weeks after the second dose, a study from the UK Health Security Agency found.

While two doses still provide good protection against severe illness, the study found that booster shots increased protection against symptomatic infection to 75 per cent.

Pfizer claims its own studies show a third dose of its vaccine produces a 25-fold increase in neutralising antibodies against the new strain.

Early in 2021, Dr Bourla had said data showed Pfizer’s vaccine “was 100 per cent effective against severe Covid-19”.

Writing in The Wall Street Journal on Sunday, Nobel prize-winning virologist Luc Montagnier and constitutional scholar Jed Rubenfeld argued the rise of Omicron had made the Biden administration’s vaccine mandates “obsolete”.

“It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target,” they wrote.

“Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here.”

They pointed to the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) position on vaccine mandates, which states that “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission”.

For Omicron, they noted, “there is as yet no such evidence” and moreover, “the little data we have suggests the opposite”.

“One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative – i.e. vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection,” they wrote.

“Confirming this negative efficacy finding, data from Denmark and the Canadian province of Ontario indicate that vaccinated people have higher rates of Omicron infection than unvaccinated people.”

Dr Montagnier and Mr Rubenfeld added that while there was “some early evidence” that boosters may reduce Omicron infections, “the effect appears to wane quickly, and we don’t know if repeated boosters would be an effective response to the surge of Omicron”.

Their comments come after the UK’s head vaccine adviser, Professor Sir Andrew Pollard, who helped develop the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, called for an end to ongoing mass vaccination.

“It really is not affordable, sustainable or probably even needed to vaccinate everyone on the planet every four to six months,” Prof Pollard told BBC Radio 4’s Today program. “In the future, we need to target the vulnerable.”

On Monday, WHO called on vaccine makers to review the “strain composition” of the current vaccines in the face of Omicron.

“The Technical Advisory Group on Covid-19 Vaccine Composition considers that Covid-19 vaccines that have high impact on prevention of infection and transmission, in addition to the prevention of severe disease and death, are needed and should be developed,” WHO said in a statement.

“Until such vaccines are available, and as the SARS-CoV-2 virus evolves, the composition of current Covid-19 vaccines may need to be updated, to ensure that Covid-19 vaccines continue to provide WHO-recommended levels of protection against infection and disease by variants of concern, including Omicron and future variants.”


Expert reveals Covid-19 causing fewer hospitalisations than influenza

Coronavirus is sending fewer people to the hospital than a bad flu season despite cases threatening to top 100,000 around Australia.

Australian National University professor Peter Collignon said it was important to have perspective when looking at Covid hospitalisation and ICU numbers.

He said there were fewer hospital patients with Covid than those admitted with influenza during a recent winter.

'We're seeing a lot of people in hospital and a lot of people in ICU but we need to keep it in perspective,' he said on the Today show Wednesday.

'It's still less than what we often see in winter with influenza, for instance, a number of years ago, and it seems to be less of an issue than even six months ago with the proportion of infected people going into hospital.'

Professor Collignon said Australia's high vaccination rate meant a smaller proportion of people required care in hospital, or dying.

'So much so, that if you're vaccinated your risk is probably similar to a season of influenza, it's the one or two million unvaccinated adults we still have who are disproportionately in hospital and disproportionately in ICU,' he said.

The expert reminded people worried about being infected with the virus that Australians didn't have access to vaccines a year ago.

He said those who had their booster shot had a 'much, much lower chance of coming into serious grief than a year ago'.

'A lot of us are going to get Covid over the next year or two, but the consequences now for serious disease - which is what matters - is so much less than a year ago, we need to come to terms with that,' he said.

He said it was important to get more staff on the ground, decrease the fear level in society and ensure those vulnerable were at 'the front of the queue' for care.

Professor Collingnon was asked when he predicted Australia would hit the peak of the Omicron wave, and if infections would get worse before they got better.

'My view is that it should start flattening out in at least in the next week, a lot of the cases we're seeing is mainly being spread by people in their 20s and 30s, and you can see why because they were locked down for so long,' he replied.

'So as people are moving around less, more on holiday and interacting with large numbers less I think the numbers will come down.'

He said hospitalisations tended to lag five to seven days after infections levelled out, which he said were high, but not exponential.

Professor Collignon added that data observed from the Delta variant revealed that if a vaccinated person is naturally infected with Covid they build better immunity against the virus than what a booster shot could provide.

'Providing you're vaccinated, and if you're unlucky enough to get Omicron, you are likely to have longer-lasting immunity than even with a booster,' he explained.

'Natural infection tends to give you long-lasting immunity mainly because you're exposed to more parts of the virus rather than just the spike protein, which is the vaccine strategy.'

He urged unvaccinated people not to attempt to be infected naturally for the benefit of immunity as the chances of death or serious illness were much higher.

Experts predict Australia Day could be the day Omicron finally peaks in the major cities and the country could return to normal after that.

Major Australian cities could see a dramatic drop off in Covid-19 infections by the end of January as the Omicron surge 'runs out' of 'core' carriers to infect.

While new Covid cases topped 84,000 Australia-wide on Tuesday - including 38,000 in Victoria, 26,000 in NSW and 20,466 in Queensland - there are underlying signs that tally could dramatically improve by the end of this month.

So many of Omicron major carriers, people aged between 20 and 30, have been exposed already that the virus would began failing to reproduce when it meets people with immunity.

Initially that will happen in hotspots where the virus has run rampant, including areas of Melbourne and Sydney, and in Newcastle.

Catherine Bennett, chair of epidemiology at Deakin University, predicted the wave would start to turn around in about two weeks, before the end of January




12 January, 2022

Nation proves Omicron lockdowns don’t work

Neighbouring nations have fared little differently but have seen far fewer restrictions on daily life.

Residents of the Netherlands must now be wondering if all the pain of stay at home orders and cancelled or scaled back Christmas celebrations with the family were all worth it.

The lockdown was due to end this weekend. However with cases reaching 35,000 a day on Friday and the seven-day average marching ever upwards there are fears any relaxation of rules could result in an even steeper surge.

“The amount of infections is taking on British proportions,” epidemiologist Marino van Zelst told the website Politico.

That’s not entirely the case – Holland is still faring better on many metrics.

The UK has been recording daily cases around the 140,000 mark and its rate of infection for every million people stands at 2513 according to website Our World in Data.

The Netherlands has an average of 25,300 cases a day which is an infection rate of 1598 cases per million people.

But cases in the UK appear to be falling – or at least slowing – while in Holland they’re shooting on up.


Most Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in New Jersey Admitted for Non-COVID Reasons: Officials

The majority of people hospitalized with COVID-19 in New Jersey were actually admitted for reasons other than COVID-19, officials said on Jan. 10.

Of the 6,075 people with COVID-19 and hospitalized in the state, just 2,963 were admitted for COVID-19, New Jersey Health Commissioner Judith Persichilli said during a briefing.

“We have a fair number of what I’ve started to call COVID incidental, or incidental COVID, meaning you went in because you broke your leg, but everyone’s getting tested and it turns out you’ve got COVID. You didn’t even know it,” Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, said. “My wife didn’t know it and still she’s not back in the in the game, but never had any symptoms, so there is a significant amount of that.”

Previously during the pandemic, states largely neglected to distinguish COVID-19 hospitalizations from incidental COVID-19.

However, after large numbers of people began testing positive after the emergence of the Omicron variant, including those who have been vaccinated—some of whom have required hospital care—a growing number of officials have started making clear that not all COVID-19 hospitalizations are the same.

New York state for the first time reported last week its hospitalizations with COVID-19 versus its hospitalizations for COVID-19. Almost half of the hospitalizations listed as COVID-19 were incidental, state officials said.

Massachusetts is among the other states planning to soon make such data public.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said on Jan. 9 that some hospitals that her agency has spoken to have up to four in 10 COVID-19 patients who are being admitted for other reasons. She didn’t know how many of the deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the nation were because of other reasons, and the agency hasn’t responded to a request for that information.


Doctor’s Court Testimony: Ventilators ‘Causing Harm,’ Death in COVID Patients

The use of ventilators seem to push patients on to a path of death, says Dr. Eduardo Balbona, an independent Jacksonville doctor

“In New York, over 65 ICU ventilated patients [had] a mortality of 97 percent,” he testified before Judge Aho.

“I know in [Ascension’s] St. Vincent’s [Southside Hospital in Jacksvonille, in the] ICU, Delta last summer had a mortality of 93 percent. It’s very hard to get those kind of mortality levels from the virus itself. I believe the treatment we’re using is doing harm.”

Balbona was trained at the National Naval Medical Center and was an official doctor providing care for members Congress at the U.S. Capitol. Because he is not officially associated with Mayo Clinic, he cannot provide care to Pisano there.

His hope is that a judge will order Mayo Clinic doctors to provide the treatment he’s prescribed, allowing Pisano to be weaned from the ventilator and discharged. Only then would the Pisano family be free to follow his directives. His experience treating seriously ill patients leads him to believe Pisano could improve quickly, once started on the protocol he has recommended.

Mayo Clinic has refused to treat Pisano with the medications and supplements the family believes are his only chance to survive.

The organization’s attorneys submitted an affidavit from Dr. Pablo Moreno Franco that said, ‘“In general, it is difficult to know what the side effects would be for the medication [ivermectin] if administered at the requested level.”

More than 90 peer-reviewed studies have been published demonstrating the drug’s efficacy at treating patients suffering from COVID-19.

Since sharing his opinions about the case in interviews with news media, Balbona’s office has been flooded with calls from people angry that he wants to prescribe “horse medication.”

“I only want to do the right thing by my patients,” he told The Epoch Times. “I’m shocked others feel they must stop me. In my 30 years of practice, this has never happened.”


T Cells From Common Colds Cross-Protect Against Infection With COVID-19: Study

A type of cells produced by the body when fighting common cold viruses cross-protects people against infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, according to a study.

T cells have been recognized as a measure of protection against severe COVID-19, and previous research indicated that recovery from common colds could provide some level of shielding against the virus that causes COVID-19.

Researchers with Imperial College London found in the new study that the presence of such cells can also prevent infection by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, also known as SARS-CoV-2, which causes the disease.

The scientists assessed 52 contacts of newly diagnosed COVID-19 cases to pinpoint when they were first exposed and determined that people who tested negative for COVID-19 had higher cross-reactive T cell levels. They also took blood samples from the participants within 6 days of exposure.

“Being exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t always result in infection, and we’ve been keen to understand why. We found that high levels of pre-existing T cells, created by the body when infected with other human coronaviruses like the common cold, can protect against COVID-19 infection,” Dr. Rhia Kundu, the lead author, of Imperial’s National Heart & Lung Institute, said in a statement.

Professor Ajit Lalvani, another author, said the study “provides the clearest evidence to date that T cells induced by common cold coronaviruses play a protective role against SARS-CoV-2 infection,” adding that “these T cells provide protection by attacking proteins within the virus, rather than the spike protein on its surface.”

The discovery could help scientists develop a new version of the COVID-19 vaccine, the researchers said.

“The spike protein is under intense immune pressure from vaccine-induced antibody which drives evolution of vaccine escape mutants. In contrast, the internal proteins targeted by the protective T cells we identified mutate much less. Consequently, they are highly conserved between the various SARS-CoV-2 variants, including omicron,” Lalvani said. “New vaccines that include these conserved, internal proteins would therefore induce broadly protective T cell responses that should protect against current and future SARS-CoV-2 variants.”

They also urged people to get a COVID-19 vaccine instead of relying on the protection from cross-reactive T cells.

The currently available vaccines have proven less effective against the Omicron variant of the CCP virus, including against severe disease. While booster shots restore some of the lost protection, early data signals the boost quickly drops in effectiveness against infection after administration. Whether boosters last for longer periods of time remains unknown.


Nasal spray could prevent Covid infection for up to eight hours and is believed to be effective against ALL variants of the virus

The treatment, under development by scientists at the University of Helsinki, in Finland, has shown an ability to block coronavirus infection for up to eight hours in lab studies.

It hasn't yet been tested in humans and the lab studies are not yet peer reviewed.

This nasal spray is intended for use by immunocompromised patients and others with severe vulnerabilities to Covid.

It works by blocking the virus from replicating in the nose and, in lab studies, has performed well against all variants - unlike popular monoclonal antibody treatments that are less effective against Omicron.

In addition to continued vaccinations, many researchers are now pursuing treatments specifically for immunocompromised and other high-risk people that can supplement vaccination.

For example, in December, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized a monoclonal antibody treatment made by AstraZeneca that's designed to prevent Covid infection in high-risk patients.

A new nasal spray treatment, under development by scientists at the University of Helsinki, may also become a useful option for these patients.

The treatment was described in a preprint posted in late December, which has not yet been peer reviewed.

'Its prophylactic use is meant to protect from SARS-CoV-2 infection,' Kalle Saksela, virologist at the University of Helsinki and lead author on the study, told Gizmodo in an email.

'However, it is not a vaccine, nor meant to be an alternative for vaccines,' Saksela said, 'but rather to complement vaccination for providing additional protection for successfully vaccinated individuals in high-risk situations, and especially for immunocompromised persons - for example, those receiving immunosuppressive therapy.'

The new drug builds on previous research showing that tissue inside the nose is a prime spot for the coronavirus to replicate.

After multiplying in the nose, the virus typically progresses through the respiratory tract to the lungs - where it causes more severe symptoms.

As a result, sending anti-Covid antibodies straight into the nose can stop the virus from replicating at the earliest possible stage of disease.

The researchers first tested their drug against pseudoviruses - lab-made viruses that mimic the coronavirus.

In this test, the drug was able to stop viral replication in the original Wuhan strain, as well as the Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants.

Next, the researchers tested the drug against human cells in cell culture. Once again, it was able to neutralize several different coronavirus variants.

Finally, the researchers tested the drug in mice - administering the nasal spray to lab mice, then following it up with nasal inoculations of the coronavirus.

Among the mice that didn't receive treatment, the coronavirus spread through their nasal cavities, respiratory tracts, and lungs.

Among the mice that did receive the nasal spray, the coronavirus didn't spread at all - these animals were 'entirely free of viral antigen' and didn't show symptoms, the researchers wrote.




11 January, 2022

COVID-19: British Health Secretary directly challenged on mandatory coronavirus jabs by unvaccinated NHS doctor

Health Secretary Sajid Javid has been directly challenged by an unvaccinated hospital consultant over the government's policy of compulsory COVID jabs for NHS staff.

During a visit to King's College Hospital in south London, Mr Javid asked staff members on the intensive care unit about their thoughts on new rules requiring vaccination for NHS workers.

And Steve James, a consultant anaesthetist who has been treating coronavirus patients since the start of the pandemic, told the health secretary about his displeasure.

"I'm not happy about that," he said. "I had COVID at some point, I've got antibodies, and I've been working on COVID ICU since the beginning.

"I have not had a vaccination, I do not want to have a vaccination. The vaccines are reducing transmission only for about eight weeks for Delta, with Omicron it's probably less.

"And for that, I would be dismissed if I don't have a vaccine? The science isn't strong enough."

Mr James also revealed another of his colleagues held the same position.

Mr Javid replied: "I respect that, but there's also many different views. I understand it, and obviously we have to weigh all that up for both health and social care, and there will always be a debate about it."

The consultant suggested the health secretary could use the "changing picture" of the COVID pandemic during the Omicron wave to "reconsider" the rule.

Alternatively, Mr James suggested, the government could "nuance" the rules to allow those who have antibodies - but acquired from infection and not vaccination - to not be required to have a jab.

He told the health secretary that it "didn't make sense" to dismiss doctors who already had COVID antibodies, but who did not want to be vaccinated. "The protection that I've got from transmission is probably the equivalent to someone who is vaccinated," Mr James said.

But Mr Javid told him "at some point that will wane as well". He added that the government takes the "very best advice" from vaccine experts.

"I respect your views and more than that I respect everything you're doing here and the lives you're saving," the health secretary told Mr James.

A King's College Hospital spokesperson said: "While currently it is not a mandatory requirement for staff to get their COVID-19 vaccination or disclose vaccine status to patients, we strongly support and encourage all our staff to get their jab, in line with national guidance - and nearly 90% of our staff have already done so."

When does the requirement come in?

MPs last month voted to make vaccinations mandatory for NHS workers who have direct, face-to-face contact with patients, unless they are exempt.

The legal requirement for NHS staff to be fully vaccinated as a condition of their deployment to work is set to come into force from 1 April.

It means those health and care workers who have not yet had a first dose are likely to have to do so by early February.


UK Politics: Boris Johnson warned by top Tory MP to ditch Covid restrictions or face leadership challenge

An influential Conservative MP has warned Boris Johnson that he faces a challenge to his leadership unless he scraps all remaining coronavirus restrictions at the end of this month and vows they will not return.

Former chief whip Mark Harper, the chair of the lockdown-sceptic Covid Recovery Group of Tory backbenchers, warned that “prime ministers are on a performance-related contract” and that MPs are asking themselves whether Mr Johnson is the best-placed leader to help them retain their seats at the next election.

He told the Financial Times that the prime minister would be in trouble after May’s local elections unless he has shown that he can change his approach.

Mr Harper said it was time to accept that Covid-19 will become endemic in the UK and to focus on treatments, the vaccination of hesitant people and the creation of special wards in hospitals, while ruling out any further controls on social and economic life.

“At some point you’ve got to say, whatever happens, whatever variants turn up, we’re not going to respond by shutting down parts of the country,” he told the FT. “That’s not a sustainable position.”

Mr Harper - who stood against Johnson for the leadership in 2019 - said that if the PM attempts to extend Plan B restrictions beyond the scheduled review date of 26 January, he will face a rebellion larger than the one seen in December when 99 Tories opposed Covid passes.

“The problem is he sort of wants to agree with us, then he says he wants to keep restrictions in reserve or won’t rule them out,” Harper said. “That’s becoming an unsustainable position.

“If I was running a hospitality business I would be very nervous about investing, growing my business, taking any risks because I literally have no idea about what’s going to happen.”

If Tories do badly in the May elections and continue to trail Labour in the polls, Conservative MPs will ask themselves which potential leader is best able to help them keep their seats, said Mr Harper.

And he added: “Conservative MPs have asked themselves that question in the past and decided they need to do something about it. Prime ministers are on a performance-related contract.”


Biden administration guidance prioritizes race in administering COVID drugs

Guidance issued by the Biden administration states certain individuals may be considered "high risk" and more quickly qualify for monoclonal antibodies and oral antivirals used to treat COVID-19 based on their "race or ethnicity."

In a fact sheet issued for healthcare providers by the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency approved emergency use authorizations of sotrovimab – a monoclonal antibody proven to be effective against the Omicron variant – only to patients considered "high risk."

The guidance, updated in December 2021, says "medical conditions or factors" such as "race or ethnicity" have the potential to "place individual patients at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19," adding that the "authorization of sotrovimab under the EUA is not limited to" other factors outlined by the agency.

Older age, obesity, pregnancy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease are among the multiple medical conditions and factors associated with what are considered "high risk" individuals by the FDA.

Some states, including New York and Utah, have made it clear they will prioritize certain racial minorities over other high-risk patients when it comes to the distribution of particular COVID treatments.

Last week, New York’s Department of Health released a document detailing its plan to distribute treatments such as monoclonal antibody treatment and antiviral pills.

The plan includes a section on eligibility for the scarce antiviral pills that people must meet to receive the treatment, including a line stating a person needs to have "a medical condition or other factors that increase their risk for severe illness."

One such "risk factor" is being a race or ethnicity that is not White due to "longstanding systemic health and social inequities."

"Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor, as longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19," the memo reads.

In guidelines issued by the state of Utah for the distribution of monoclonal antibodies in the state, residents who are "non-white race or Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity" receive 2 additional points when calculating their "COVID-19 risk score."

"Race/ethnicity continues to be a risk factor for severe COVID-19 disease, and the Utah COVID Risk Score is one approach to address equitable access to hard hit communities," the Utah guidance stated, adding a reminder that national guidance from the FDA "specifically states that race and ethnicity may be considered when identifying patients most likely to benefit from this lifesaving treatment."

Similarly, the framework issued by the state of Minnesota advises clinicians and health systems to "consider heightened risk of progression to severe COVID-19 associated with race and ethnicity when determining eligibility" for the allocation for monoclonal antibody therapies.

"FDA’s acknowledgment means that race and ethnicity alone, apart from other underlying health conditions, may be considered in determining eligibility for mAbs," the framework states. "It is ethically appropriate to consider race and ethnicity in mAb eligibility decisions when data show elevated risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes for Black, Indigenous and other people of color (BIPOC populations), and that this risk cannot be adequately addressed by determining eligibility based on underlying health conditions (perhaps due to underdiagnosis of health conditions that elevate risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes in these populations)."




10 January, 2022

My Debate with an ICU Doctor About the Possible Dangers of the COVID-19 Vaccine

It's so easy to win a debate with an ignorant liberal. They have no facts. They have no brilliant oratory. Just name-calling. After my national TV interviews last week explaining why I believe the COVID-19 vaccine is killing and injuring thousands of Americans, I received an email from an intensive care unit doctor. He called me a "moron." Below is my reply filled with common sense, logic, facts and most importantly, SCIENCE about the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccine. Needless to say, the doctor never replied.

Dear David,

First, I read and answer all my own emails. I'm answering you personally. I don't engage in ignorant terms like "moron" toward people that disagree with me.

Second, this country (and world) is filled with both unvaccinated and vaccinated who are sick with COVID-19. It's a nasty and contagious flu. At this moment almost every vaccinated person I know is sick with COVID-19. A report released by the Robert Koch Institute stated that in Germany over 96% of those with COVID-19 are vaccinated.

Third, some studies show that the COVID-19 vaccine damages the immune system, thereby making it more likely that the vaccinated will get sick with each successive variant.

Fourth, if the vaccine is so great, why do the deep blue states like New York have massive COVID-19 outbreaks? New York City just set the all-time record for COVID-19 infections in a day. New York right now has almost 30% of all the COVID-19 cases nationwide. How could this happen if vaccines, masks and lockdowns worked?

Fifth, if the vaccine is so great, why are there far more COVID-19 deaths in 2021 with the vaccine than there were in 2020 -- without it?

Sixth, as a M.D., why don't you pay attention to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System? It's been the gold standard for decades to identify if any vaccine is causing more harm than good.

This COVID-19 jab may have killed over 21,000 Americans. That's separate from the cardiac arrests, strokes, blood clots and permanent disabilities that could be associated with the vaccine. And this jab has potentially caused a staggering 1 million "adverse effects." These numbers are from VAERS -- user-reported data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Seventh, are you aware Columbia University researchers found that adverse events associated with vaccines could be vastly underreported? They suggest you must multiply by 20 to approximate the accurate number of deaths and injuries. So according to the math of Columbia researchers, there are actually over 400,000 deaths and millions of injuries that could be tied to the vaccine.

How could you doubt VAERS? Pfizer's own research showed that there were 1,200 deaths during the initial first few weeks of their vaccine rollout. That's Pfizer's reporting.

Anyone who wants the vaccine should get it. It's called choice. They should thank former President Donald Trump for the availability of this vaccine.

The rest of us who are relatively healthy and/or relatively young have a 99.9% recovery rate from COVID-19. No one should be FORCED to vaccinate, mask, endure lockdowns, lose their job or close their business in America. We have choices. We take risks every day.

Certainly, people should agree that no baby, toddler, child or teen should ever be forced to take this jab. As a John Hopkins study proved, the risk of a child dying is basically zero. Out of 48,000 childhood cases of COVID-19 they studied, no healthy child died.

I've had COVID-19. It was gone in 48 hours after I took ivermectin, plus antibiotic (Z Pak), plus megadoses of vitamins C, D3, zinc and quercetin. Plus, I received intravenous vitamin C. Worked like a charm. Gone in 48 hours. Mild.

I now have immunity. No one with immunity needs to vaccinate. I believe the risks far outweigh the benefits. I make healthy lifestyle choices. I'm not anti-vaccine. I'm pro-immune system.

Justus R. Hope, M.D., and others report that in India, the government ended the worst COVID-19 outbreak anywhere in the world by handing out free packets of ivermectin plus vitamins. They report that COVID-19 went away literally overnight, and deaths dropped to virtually zero. That's exactly what America should have done and should be doing right now.

There are dozens of studies around the world that demonstrate the efficacy of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as antivirals versus COVID-19.

I wish you well. I hope I've opened your eyes to the alternatives out there. I know what you see each day in your ICU: the sickest of the sick. It's tragic they have no access to ivermectin or HCQ, plus vitamins like C, D3 and zinc. Early treatment (in the first three to five days) with this combination would almost guarantee few ever wind up at the ICU -- where you see them and where it may already be too late.

It's important to allow different opinions and questions. If "science" won't respect or allow discussion or debate, it's no longer science; it's just propaganda


Treat Covid like the FLU: Ex-chief of the UK's vaccine taskforce calls for 'new targeted strategy' to manage the virus

Coronavirus should be treated like the flu and Britain's mass jabs programme should be scrapped after the booster campaign is complete, the ex-chief of the UK's vaccine taskforce has said.

Dr Clive Dix, who was chairman of the government agency from December 2020 until April, called for a return to a 'new normality' and a volte-face on the approach throughout the pandemic.

He said the country needs to learn to manage the disease rather than focus on halting the spread of the virus amid hope the Omicron variant is even less severe than the flu.

The latest vaccination figures showed that 22,526 first dose jabs, 32,455 second doses and 207,801 booster jabs were delivered on Friday. It brings the total number of people to have received at least two doses of a vaccine to 47,632,483, whilst 35,273,945 have received a booster jab.

It comes as Britain's daily Covid figures fell for the third day in a row on Saturday, official data showed in a sign the worst of the latest wave may be over.

UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) figures show there were 146,390 new positive tests over the last 24 hours, down 18.5 per cent on the previous week's figure of 179,637.

It marked the biggest week-on-week fall since the start of November, well before the supermutant strain sent cases soaring across the country.

But the number of people dying with the virus continued to increase, with 313 fatalities recorded — up 103 per cent on last week's number.

It meant that more than 150,000 people have now died within 28 days of testing positive for Covid-19 since the start of the pandemic nearly two years ago.

Dr Dix, who is now CEO for pharmaceutical firm C4X Discovery, told the Observer: 'We need to analyse whether we use the current booster campaign to ensure the vulnerable are protected, if this is seen to be necessary. Mass population-based vaccination in the UK should now end.'

He told the newspaper ministers need to support research into immunity from the virus beyond antibodies.

The scientist called for them to help study B-cells and T-cells and how they could make jabs to battle certain types of Covid variants.

'We now need to manage disease, not virus spread. So stopping progression to severe disease in vulnerable groups is the future objective,' he said.

He added: 'We should consider when we stop testing and let individuals isolate when they are not well and return to work when they feel ready, in the same way we do in a bad influenza season.'

His comments about flu came after scientists suggested the Omicron variant could be less deadly than the seasonal virus.

MailOnline analysis showed Covid killed one in 33 people who tested positive at the peak of the devastating second wave last January, compared to just one in 670 now. But experts believe the figure could be even lower because of Omicron.

Last week, Professor Robert Dingwall, a former JCVI member of and expert in sociology at Nottingham Trent University, told MailOnline it will be a few weeks until there are definitive Omicron fatality rates, but if they are consistent with the findings that it is less severe 'we should be asking whether we are justified in having any measures we would not bring for a bad flu season'.

He said: 'If we would not have brought in the measures in November 2019, why are we doing it now? What's the specific justification for doing it?

'If the severity of Covid infection is falling away to the point that it is comparable with flu then we really shouldn't have exceptional levels of intervention.'

Dr Dix's intervention came after Professor Andrew Hayward, who sits on the Government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the death figure total passed on Saturday was an 'absolute tragedy' made worse because 'many of them were avoidable if we had acted earlier in the first and second wave'.

With a total of 150,057 deaths within 28 days of a positive test, the UK became the seventh country to pass the milestone, following the US, Brazil, India, Russia, Mexico and Peru. It means it is also the first in Europe

It comes as Conservative MPs but Boris Johnson under pressure to announce a 'Covid Freedom Day' and lift all curbs on public movement.

They argued that the money generated from the move could be used to combat the soaring cost of energy bills.

Former chief whip Mark Harper, who chairs the Covid Recovery Group of Tory MPs, told The Sun: 'As we head into what will be a difficult few months for many, a great way to help people with the cost of living would be to get the economy motoring.

Dr Nick Davies said that he and his team were working on revised scenarios that will soon be presented to scientific advisers and senior civil servants.

'That starts by removing Plan B Covid restrictions when they are meant to expire in two and a half weeks’ time. We need a Learn-to-live-with-it Day. I’m not saying Covid won’t present challenges in the future, but we are going to have to live with it and not deal with it as an emergency crisis forever.'




9 January, 2022

Prime Age Mortality up 40 Percent, Majority of Deaths Not From COVID-19

The obvious but unstated point arising from the figures below is that many of the extra deaths would have been related not to COVID but to the government response to it. A big problem would seem to be (for instance) that many people bombed themselves out with drugs to enable them to cope with isolation etc. Ill-advised government policies were a major cause of deaths

Mortality among young-to-middle-age Americans went through the roof last year. The majority of the increase didn’t involve COVID-19, according to official death certificate data.

Deaths among people aged 18 to 49 increased more than 40 percent in the 12 months ending October 2021 compared to the same period in 2018–2019, before the pandemic, based on death certificate data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

That’s more than 90,000 additional deaths in this age group, of which less than 43 percent involved COVID.

The federal agency doesn’t yet have full 2021 numbers, as death certificate data usually trickle in with an 8-week lag or more.

The mortality increase was most notable for the 30–39 age group, where deaths skyrocketed by nearly 45 percent, with only a third involving COVID.

CDC data on the exact causes of those excess deaths aren’t yet available for 2021, aside from those involving COVID, pneumonia, and influenza. There were close to 6,000 excess pneumonia deaths that didn’t involve COVID-19 in the 30–39 age group in the 12 months ending October 2021. Influenza was only involved in 50 deaths in this age group, down from 550 in the same period pre-pandemic. The flu death count didn’t exclude those that also involved COVID or pneumonia, the CDC noted.

A chunk of the mortality spike could be likely explained by drug overdoses, which increased from about 72,000 in 2019 to more than 100,000 in the 12 months ending May 2021, the CDC estimated. About two-thirds of those deaths involved synthetic opioids including fentanyl that are often smuggled to the United States from China through Mexico. Overdoses involving methamphetamine or other psychostimulants also significantly increased, from fewer than 17,000 in 2019 to more than 28,000 in the 12 months ending May 2021.

For older age groups, mortality increased too. For those 50–84, it went up more than 27 percent, making for a total of more than 470,000 excess deaths. Almost four out of five of the excess deaths reportedly involved COVID.

For those 85 or older, mortality increased about 12 percent with more than 100,000 excess deaths. Given the more than 130,000 COVID-related deaths in this group, the data indicates that these people were less likely to die of a non-COVID-related cause from November 2020 to October 2021 than during the same months of 2018–2019.

Comparing 2020 to 2019, mortality increased some 24 percent for those 18–49, with less than a third of those excess deaths involving COVID. For those 50–84, it increased less than 20 percent, with over 70 percent of that involving COVID. For those even older, mortality jumped about 16 percent, with nearly 90 percent of that involving COVID.

For those under 18, mortality decreased about 0.4 percent in 2020 compared to 2019. In the 12 months ending October 2021, it decreased some 3.3 percent compared to the same period in 2018–2019.


The Collins and Fauci Attack on Traditional Public Health

On Oct. 4, 2020, with professor Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University, we wrote the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD). Our purpose was to express our grave concerns over the inadequate protection of the vulnerable and the devastating harms of the lockdown pandemic policy adopted by much of the world; we proposed an alternative strategy of focused protection.

The key scientific fact on which the GBD was based—a more than thousand-fold higher risk of death for the old compared to the young—meant that better protection of the old would minimize COVID deaths. At the same time, opening schools and lifting lockdowns would reduce the collateral harm to the rest of the population.

The declaration received enormous support, ultimately attracting signatures from more than 50,000 scientists and medical professionals and more than 800,000 members of the public. Our hope in writing was two-fold. First, we wanted to help the public understand that—contrary to the prevailing narrative—there was no scientific consensus in favor of lockdown. In this, we succeeded.

Second, we wanted to spur a discussion among public health scientists about how to better protect the vulnerable, both those living in nursing homes (where approximately 40 percent of all COVID deaths have occurred) and those living in the community. We provided specific proposals for focused protection in the GBD and supporting documents to spur the discussion. Though some in public health did engage civilly in productive discussions with us, in this aim we had limited success.

Unbeknownst to us, our call for a more focused pandemic strategy posed a political problem for Dr. Francis Collins and Dr. Anthony Fauci. The former is a geneticist who, until Dec. 19, 2021, was the director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH); the latter is an immunologist who directs the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). They are the biggest funders of medical and infectious disease research worldwide.

Collins and Fauci played critical roles in designing and advocating for the pandemic lockdown strategy adopted by the United States and many other countries. In emails written four days after the Great Barrington Declaration and disclosed recently after a FOIA request, it was revealed that the two conspired to undermine the declaration. Rather than engaging in scientific discourse, they authorized “a quick and devastating published takedown” of this proposal, which they characterized as by “three fringe epidemiologists” from Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford.

Across the pond, they were joined by their close colleague, Dr. Jeremy Farrar, the head of the Wellcome Trust, one of the world’s largest nongovernmental funders of medical research. He worked with Dominic Cummings, the political strategist of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Together, they orchestrated “an aggressive press campaign against those behind the Great Barrington Declaration and others opposed to blanket COVID-19 restrictions.”

Ignoring the call for focused protection of the vulnerable, Collins and Fauci purposely mischaracterized the GBD as a “let-it-rip” “herd immunity strategy,” even though focused protection is the very opposite of a let-it-rip strategy. It’s more appropriate to call the lockdown strategy that has been followed a “let-it-rip” strategy. Without focused protection, every age group will eventually be exposed in equal proportion, albeit at a prolonged “let-it-drip” pace compared to a do-nothing strategy.

When journalists started asking us why we wanted to “let the virus rip,” we were puzzled. Those words aren’t in the GBD, and they are contrary to the central idea of focused protection. It’s unclear whether Collins and Fauci ever read the GBD, whether they deliberately mischaracterized it, or whether their understanding of epidemiology and public health is more limited than we had thought. In any case, it was a lie.

We were also puzzled by the mischaracterization of the GBD as a “herd immunity strategy.” Herd immunity is a scientifically proven phenomenon, as fundamental in infectious disease epidemiology as gravity is in physics. Every COVID strategy leads to herd immunity, and the pandemic ends when a sufficient number of people have immunity through either COVID-recovery or a vaccine. It makes as much sense to claim that an epidemiologist is advocating for a “herd immunity strategy” as it does to claim that a pilot is advocating a “gravity strategy” when landing an airplane. The issue is how to land the plane safely, and whatever strategy the pilot uses, gravity ensures that the plane will eventually return to earth.

The fundamental goal of the GBD is to get through this terrible pandemic with the least harm to the public’s health. Health, of course, is broader than just COVID. Any reasonable evaluation of lockdowns should consider their collateral damage to patients with cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and other infectious diseases, as well as mental health and much else. Based on long-standing principles of public health, the GBD and focused protection of the high-risk population is a middle ground between devastating lockdowns and a do-nothing, let-it rip strategy.

Collins and Fauci surprisingly claimed that focused protection of the old is impossible without a vaccine. Scientists have their own specialties, but not every scientist has deep expertise in public health. The natural approach would have been to engage with epidemiologists and public health scientists for whom this is their bread and butter. Had they done so, Collins and Fauci would have learned that public health is fundamentally about focused protection.

It’s impossible to shut down society completely. Lockdowns protected young low-risk affluent work-from-home professionals, such as administrators, scientists, professors, journalists, and lawyers, while older high-risk members of the working class were exposed and died in necessarily high numbers. This failure to understand that lockdowns couldn’t protect the vulnerable led to the tragically high death counts from COVID.

We don’t know why Collins and Fauci decided to do a “takedown” rather than use their esteemed positions to build and promote vigorous scientific discussions on these critical issues, engaging scientists with different expertise and perspectives. Part of the answer may lie in another puzzle—their blindness to the devastating effects of lockdowns on other public health outcomes.

Lockdown harms have affected everyone, with an extra-heavy burden on the chronically ill; on children, for whom schools were closed; on the working class, especially those in the densely populated inner cities; and on the global poor, with tens of millions suffering from malnutrition and starvation. For example, Fauci was a major advocate for school closures. These are now widely recognized as an enormous mistake that harmed children without affecting disease spread. In the coming years, we must work hard to reverse the damage caused by our misguided pandemic strategy.

While tens of thousands of scientists and medical professionals signed the Great Barrington Declaration, why didn’t more speak up in the media? Some did, some tried but failed, while others were very cautious about doing so. When we wrote the declaration, we knew that we were putting our professional careers at risk, as well as our ability to provide for our families. That was a conscious decision on our part, and we fully sympathize with those who instead decided to focus on maintaining their important research laboratories and activities.

Scientists will naturally hesitate before putting themselves in a situation in which the NIH director, with an annual scientific research budget of $42.9 billion, wants to take them down. It may also be unwise to upset the director of NIAID, with an annual budget of $6.1 billion for infectious disease research, or the director of the Wellcome Trust, with an annual budget of $1.5 billion. Sitting atop powerful funding agencies, Collins, Fauci, and Farrar channel research dollars to nearly every infectious disease epidemiologist, immunologist, and virologist of note in the United States and UK.

Collins, Fauci, and Farrar got the pandemic strategy they advocated for, and they own the results together with other lockdown proponents. The GBD was and is inconvenient for them because it stands as clear evidence that a better, less deadly alternative was available.

We now have more than 800,000 COVID deaths in the United States, plus the collateral damage. Sweden and other Scandinavian countries—less focused on lockdowns and more focused on protecting the old—have had fewer COVID deaths per population than the United States, the UK, and most other European countries. Florida, which avoided much of the collateral lockdown harms, currently ranks 22nd best in the United States in age-adjusted COVID mortality.

In academic medicine, landing an NIH grant makes or breaks careers, so scientists have a strong incentive to stay on the right side of NIH and NIAID priorities. If we want scientists to speak freely in the future, we should avoid having the same people in charge of public health policy and medical research funding.




7 January, 2022

My pictorial home page

I have just put up the 2021 edition. See here (

There are also backups of all my picture pages here


Fauci’s strategy Causing ‘Thousands of People’ to Die Each Month

While promoting the use of masks and vaccines to fight the coronavirus, Dr. Anthony Fauci and many U.S. health officials have discouraged the use of therapeutics.

In a conversation with his father Ron Paul, Republican Sen. Rand Paul said Fauci’s strategy is causing thousands of needless deaths every month.

“I think Fauci is of the philosophy that vaccines are incredibly successful and are the way to go versus therapeutics, for example,” Paul said.

“As the AIDS epidemic came up, he wanted to develop a vaccine. There’s nothing wrong with that.” Of course, this turned out to be unsuccessful — a vaccine for AIDS has still not been created.

In Paul’s eyes, Fauci did not learn from his mistake as he led the response to the coronavirus pandemic.

“I would venture to say that thousands of people die in our country every month now from COVID because he’s de-emphasized the idea that there are therapeutics,” he said.

While Paul’s claim may be unverifiable, it is correct that the Biden administration has hindered the availability of therapeutics to treat COVID-19.

In August, CBS News reported that the CDC had issued an advisory warning against the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19. It said there was “insufficient data” to show the anti-parasite drug could treat the virus.

Ivermectin had already been approved by the FDA to treat conditions like head lice and rosacea in humans. The CDC said the drug was “generally safe and well tolerated” as a prescription for those issues.

However, the CDC’s warning against ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment led to widespread disparaging of the drug. Establishment media outlets spoke out against its use, and doctors refused to prescribe it even as a last resort.

The FDA has not approved the use of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19


Mum woke from 28-day Covid coma after being treated with Viagra

A nurse fighting for her life in a 28-day Covid coma was saved after colleagues used Viagra to treat her.

Monica Almeida, 37, was just 72 hours from her ventilator being turned off when medics had the idea to use the erectile dysfunction drug, reports The Sun.

The level of oxygen the mum-of-two needed dropped by half and her condition improved after a week - meaning she made it home for Christmas.

Monica has now praised the quick-thinking doctors for using the drug, which helped opened up her airways.

The specialist respiratory nurse, from the UK, said: “I had a little joke with the consultant after I came round because I knew him.

“He told me it was the Viagra, I laughed and thought he was joking, but he said ‘no, really, you’ve had a large dose of Viagra’. “It was my little Christmas miracle.”

Monica, who treated Covid patients while working for NHS Lincolnshire, tested positive for the disease in October.

The double-jabbed mum had lost her sense of taste and smell and was coughing up blood by day four of her diagnosis.

After her oxygen levels dropped the next day, she went to hospital but was discharged with a prescription and no treatment.

Within just two hours of being home, Monica woke up unable to breathe and was rushed to Lincoln County Hospital where she went straight to the resuscitation room.

Medics battled to restore her oxygen levels to normal but her condition deteriorated and she was taken to ICU.

She was placed in a coma on November 16 with her condition so severe, her parents were told to fly from Portugal to England to say their goodbyes.

Monica said: “I could have been gone at just 37 years old, but I suppose I was a bit of a monkey and kept on fighting.”

With the prognosis looking bleak, doctors decided to use the unusual treatment to help Monica.

The brave Covid victim emerged from her coma on December 14 and was allowed to return home on Christmas Eve.

Viagra has previously been banded around as a possible way to treat Covid patients as the little blue pill dilates blood vessels and opens the airways.

Scientists are carrying out tests to determine whether it can be used in the same way as inhaling nitric oxide, which can boost oxygen levels in the blood.

Viagra can be given to Brit coronavirus patients if they have agreed to be in a study to try experimental drugs.

Monica said: “It was definitely the Viagra that saved me. “Within 48 hours it opened up my airways and my lungs started to respond.

“If you think how the drug works, it expands your blood vessels.

“I have asthma and my air sacs needed a little help.”

The mum is now recovering at her home with her husband Artur and two sons aged nine and 14.

She is now urging people to get the vaccine after being told she would have died if she hadn’t been jabbed.

Covid booster jabs offer the best chance to get through the pandemic, health officials have repeatedly said.

Monica said: “There are people out there saying the vaccine has killed people. I’m not denying there are people who react and get poorly with the vaccine, but when we look at the amount of deaths we have in unvaccinated people there is a big message there to have your jab.

“It does worry me, especially in Lincolnshire, that people are against having the vaccine.

“I never expected at 37 years of age to get as ill as I did. I never thought this would happen to me and I want people to take it more seriously.”


Active ingredient in magic mushrooms could help treat mental health disorders including PTSD, research suggests

Scientists say that small doses of the psychedelic drug psilocybin, found in 'magic' mushrooms are not only good at easing disorders resistant to treatment but they also have no short or long-term side effects in healthy people.

Researchers in a study led by the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN) at King's College London, found that the drug can be given safely in doses of either 10mg or 25mg to up to six patients.

The report, in partnership with COMPASS Pathways, is an essential first step for experts to prove the safety and feasibility of drug psilocybin as a treatment alongside talking therapies for a range of conditions including treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and PTSD.

It is the first drug to go head-to-head with the traditional and often ineffective treatments on the market.

Early research hailed the mushroom as a promising treatment but no human trials have been conducted until now.

It is the first trial of its kind to thoroughly investigate the magic of the mushroom.

A sample of 89 participants who had not used psilocybin within a year were recruited to take part in the trial. Then 60 people were picked at random to receive either 10mg or 25mg of the drug in a controlled lab environment. The patients received one-to-one support from trained psychotherapists after the doses were administered.

A placebo drug was given to the remaining 29 participants who acted as the control group and were also given psychological support.

The participants were closely monitored for six to eight hours and they were then followed up for 12 weeks.

During this time, they were assessed to track the number of possible changes, including sustained attention, memory, planning, as well as their ability to process emotions.

Dr James Rucker, a clinical scientist from the National Institute for Health Research, was the study's lead author. He said: 'This rigorous study is an important first demonstration that the simultaneous administration of psilocybin can be explored further.

'If we think about how psilocybin therapy (if approved) may be delivered in the future, it's important to demonstrate the feasibility and the safety of giving it to more than one person at the same time, so we can think about how we scale up the treatment.'

Dr Rucker, who is also an honorary consultant psychiatrist at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust added: 'This therapy has promise for people living with serious mental health problems, like treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and PTSD.

'They can be extremely disabling, distressing and disruptive, but current treatment options for these conditions are ineffective or partially effective for many people.'

There were no suggestions that either of the psilocybin doses had any short or long-term negative effects on the participant and no one withdrew from the study.

Professor Guy Goodwin the chief medical officer at COMPASS Pathways, said: 'This study was an early part of our clinical development programme for COMP360 psilocybin therapy.

'It explored the safety and feasibility of simultaneous psilocybin administration, with one to one support, in healthy participants, and provided a strong foundation to which we have now added positive results from our Phase IIb trial in 233 patients with TRD, and from our open-label study of patients taking SSRI antidepressants alongside psilocybin therapy.

'We are looking forward to finalising plans for our phase three programme, which we expect to begin in Q3 2022.'

Since this study was conducted, the researchers have completed phase two of the study, which has explored the efficacy and safety of psilocybin in people living with TRD and PTSD, and are now analysing their findings.

This study was published in The Journal of Psychopharmacology.




6 January, 2022

A sign of what’s to come for others? South Africa’s Omicron wave has ‘subsided’ after striking up to HALF of nation as doctor says they’re now in a ‘good place’

South Africa's Omicron wave has completely collapsed and the country has reached the 'turning point in the pandemic', a doctor on the frontline in Johannesburg claimed today amid growing hopes that Britain's outbreak will also be short-lived.

Professor Shabir Madhi, a vaccine expert at the University of the Witwatersrand, said the variant was 'very much subsiding' and had already 'pretty much subsided' in Gauteng — the first province to fall victim to the extremely-infectious variant.

He estimated up to 50 per cent of the country's 58.8million people caught Omicron since it first emerged, despite just 500,000 infections being recorded since the strain was first spotted on November 23.

While Covid infections soared to an 'unprecedented' level, Professor Madhi said there was a 'complete uncoupling' of hospitalisation and deaths. Figures show hospitalisations barely reached a third of rates seen in previous peaks, while fatalities stayed 10 times lower.

Professor Madhi told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I think we are in a good place in South Africa and I think we've reached the turning point in this pandemic.'

It comes after another 8,078 cases were recorded in South Africa yesterday, a rise of 12 per cent in a week, after tumbling for 17 days in a row. Officially, daily cases peaked at nearly 27,000 on December 15.

Hospital admissions also rose 8 per cent with 309 reported, however they have also been trending downwards for the past fortnight. Deaths — the biggest lagging indicator — rose to 139, the highest since the Omicron wave took off. But they are still a far cry from the 600 per day at the peak of the Delta wave.

The shrinking wave comes despite only a quarter of South Africans being double-jabbed. There is growing hope that Britain's variant-fuelled outbreak will follow a similar trajectory, where more than 70 per cent have had two jabs and half have had three.

In London — the UK's Omicron epicentre — infections and hospitalisations appear to be flatlining already. There were 347 admissions in the capital on New Year's Day, the latest day with data, down 7 per cent compared to the previous week. It is the second day in a row admissions have fallen week-on-week.

While daily infections nationally are running at record levels — 218,000 Britons tested positive yesterday — the number of Covid patients in hospital is still a fraction of previous peaks.

There are 15,000 Covid inpatients now compared to nearly 40,000 last January and about a third of current patients are not primarily sick with the virus. Fewer sufferers are also requiring ventilation.

Professor Madhi told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'Across the country the wave is very much subsiding.

'Certainly, what was initially the epicentre Gauteng, the wave has pretty much subsided and what we’ve experienced is an unprecedented number of cases compared to what was experienced in the past.

Professor Madhi said: 'This time around it‘s probably been a greater proportion of the population that has been infected.

'South Africa does about one fourteenth of UK testing. So when we report about 25,000 cases per day you could probably multiply that by about 14.

'My estimate is it is about 40 to 50 per cent of people in South Africa possibly have been infected during the course of this particular wave.'

High levels of immunity among the population from previous Covid infections prevented further cases and drove down transmission, he said.

But Professor Madhi warned South Africa's experience with Omicron may not be replicated in the UK and other countries that do not have high levels of natural immunity.

Around three-quarters of South Africans are thought to have been infected before Omicron emerged, but just 25 per cent have had a least one Covid jab.

Experts estimate less than half of people in the UK have had Covid, while 90 per cent of over-12s have had at least one jab.

He said: 'The big question is whether immunity primarily through vaccination plays the same role against protecting against severe disease as does natural infection-derived immunity. And I believe it does.'

Professor Madhi said it is 'certainly unpredictable as to what the next variant will look like' but T-cell protection from infection and vaccination protects against severe disease and is 'relatively well-preserved'.

'So I think we are in a good place in South Africa and I think we've reached the turning point in this pandemic,' he added.


CDC: Omicron Now 95 Percent of All New US COVID-19 Cases

The COVID-19 Omicron variant accounted for approximately 95.4 percent of U.S. COVID-19 cases diagnosed in the week ended Jan. 1, said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in an update published Tuesday.

With the CDC’s finding, it suggests Omicron is highly contagious, as it was able to displace the previously dominant Delta strain in only a few weeks. The Delta variant now accounts for about 4.6 percent of all cases, the CDC figures show.

About two weeks ago, the CDC reported that Omicron only accounted for about 38 percent of all COVID-19 cases for the week ending on Dec. 18. The agency significantly revised its estimates for Omicron’s prevalence for the week ending on Dec. 25 from 73 percent to about 58 percent.

The United States, meanwhile, set a global record of almost 1 million new coronavirus infections reported on Monday, according to a tally, nearly double the country’s peak of 505,109 hit just a week ago.

About 978,856 new infections that were reported Monday include some cases from Saturday and Sunday, when many states do not report. The average number of U.S. deaths per day has remained fairly steady throughout December and into early January at about 1,300, according to a Reuters tally.

“We are seeing more and more studies pointing out that Omicron is infecting the upper part of the body. Unlike other ones, the lungs who would be causing severe pneumonia,” World Health Organization (WHO) Incident Manager Abdi Mahamud told Swiss-based journalists on Tuesday.

He said it is good news, “but we really require more studies to prove that.”

Since the heavily mutated variant was first detected in November, WHO data show it has spread quickly and emerged in at least 128 countries. However, while case numbers have surged to all-time records around the world, the hospitalization and death rates are often lower than at other phases in the pandemic.

“What we are seeing now is … the decoupling between the cases and the deaths,” Mahamud said.


Frontline Doctor Highlights His Preferred COVID-19 Treatments

While the Omicron variant of COVID seems to be causing less severe disease than the Delta variant, it’s still landing some people in hospitals, highlighting the need for effective treatment before cases progress to that stage, a frontline doctor says.

Dr. Syed Haider has treated more than 4,000 COVID-19-positive patients so far during the pandemic. Just five ended up going to a hospital, and none have died.

The doctor said his preferred treatments include many off-label medications along with vitamins and supplements.

“Vitamin D is really important, ivermectin is important, fluvoxamine, hydroxychloroquine also works, it’s just a lot of people have been convinced that it doesn’t at this point, and are scared off of trying it,” Haider told NTD’s “Capitol Report.” “But I prefer ivermectin, fluvoxamine, Vitamin D, Vitamin C, quercetin, zinc.”

Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic that has had mixed results against COVID-19 in clinical trials and isn’t advised by the Food and Drug Administration to treat the disease. Fluvoxamine is an antidepressant that’s gaining popularity for use against COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine is an anti-malarial that has shown some success in treating the disease. Quercetin is a plant pigment that’s not widely known yet as a treatment for COVID-19.

Haider has also recommended flax seed oil.

“One really easy thing that anyone can do is just follow the directions on a bottle of hydrogen peroxide, you can get this at the store, can dilute it down to 1 percent swish swish it through your nose, or swish it through your mouth and drip it into your nose or use a neti pot to rinse out your nose. And it’s not uncomfortable, it shouldn’t be burning, if it’s burning, you would want to dilute it a little bit more, and that kills the virus on contact,” he said.

Haider’s list differs from the National Institutes of Health’s recently updated treatment recommendations for non hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

The agency recommends using Pfizer’s COVID-19 pill, known as paxlovid; Merck’s pill, called molnupiravir; GlaxoSmithKline’s monoclonal antibody treatment, sotrovimab; or Gilead Sciences’s remdesivir, administered through IV over multiple days.

The recommendations stem from studies that demonstrate the therapeutics’ effectiveness, the agency said.

Haider, however, doesn’t agree with the remdesivir recommendation, noting it’s never received an endorsement from the World Health Organization and that it has the side effect of causing kidney failure.

The virus that causes COVID-19, he said, is “very, very easily treatable” if early treatment is done with off-label drugs, Haider stressed.

He advises people get prepared ahead of time.

“I think people need to take this seriously and get medications on hand before they get sick,” Dr. Syed Haider told “Capitol Report.”

While Omicron often manifests as a bad cold, even some people who are considered at low-risk of developing severe disease will end up with severe cases, the doctor said. Additionally, emerging data indicate that the protection provided by both vaccination and natural immunity isn’t as good against Omicron, emphasizing the need to be ready.




5 January, 2922

Why we shouldn’t yet be worried about the latest new Covid variant

Another day, another variant. While the reaction to Omicron was immediate and one laced with genuine fear and concern, the emergence of a new strain in southeastern France has been met with a shrug of the shoulders by many scientists.

On paper, B.1.640.2 looks problematic. Like Omicron, it has multiple mutations, 46 in total, many of which are located in its spike protein - the part of the virus responsible for gaining entry to human cells.

In reality, this is a variant that predates Omicron yet has failed to take off globally in the same way.

It appears to have first popped up on scientists’ radars in early November, when the first sequenced case of B.1.640.2 was uploaded from Paris to a global variant database called Gisaid.

The first sequence of Omicron was uploaded three weeks later, on 22 November, and in the time that followed has spread rapidly across the world, reaching all six continents by the turn of the new year.

In contrast, B.1.640.2 appears to have been limited to minor clusters here and there, as seen in southeastern France where 12 people were infected with the variant, according to a non peer-reviewed study released before Christmas.

The ‘index case’ - the first individual identified at the heart of a cluster - was vaccinated against Covid and had returned from Cameroon three days before his positive result. The study claims he developed “mild” respiratory symptoms the day before his diagnosis.

However, when the scientists took a dive into Cameroon’s own genomic data, they were unable to find any sequences of B.1.640.2, suggesting the variant either hasn’t been detected in the country yet, or originated from elsewhere.

Perhaps it could be the case that the French traveller had a fleeting encounter with someone in an airport who was infected with B.1.640.2. At this stage, we simply don’t know.

Regardless, the alarm bells have yet to be rung when it comes to this particular variant.

Tom Peacock, a virologist at imperial College, said B.1.640.2 was “not one worth worrying about too much” at the moment. “This virus has had a decent chance to cause trouble but never really materialised,” he said on Twitter.

Other close viral cousins of B.1.640.2 have similarly been in circulation for weeks, but have also struggled to make an impact.

As to why it has this variant hasn’t been as successful in spreading as Omicron - despite its high mutation count - we can only speculate.

Although B.1.640.2 carries many of the same mutations seen in previous variants of concern, much depends on how they combine with one another to shape the characteristics of the virus.

It could be the case that some of the mutations are actually detrimental to the virus’ ability to enter our cells or replicate, thus hindering its ability to rapidly spread.

Data on B.1.640.2 is light, and until scientists have more of it, it’s unlikely they’ll be able to provide a clear answer as to why this particular variant hasn’t come to dominate.

Should that remain the case, it will ultimately be a good thing. For now, Omicron is the main variant of concern. Unless the picture changes considerably for whatever reason, that should be the predominant focus of our attention and scientific endeavours in the weeks to come.


Puerto Rico Faces Staggering Covid Case Explosion

More evidence that vaccination is only weakly protective against Omicron

The island had a 4,600 percent increase in cases in recent weeks after mounting one of the nation’s most successful vaccination campaigns.

At one point this week, the daily case count had surpassed 11,000, a very high figure for an island with just 3.2 million inhabitants.

Armed with her vaccine passport and a giddy urge to celebrate the holiday season, Laura Delgado — and 60,000 other people in Puerto Rico — attended a Bad Bunny concert three weeks ago.

Three days later, she was sick with Covid-19, one of about 2,000 people who fell ill as a result of the two-day event.

“We did so well; we followed the rules,” said Ms. Delgado, a 53-year-old interior designer. “We followed the mask mandate. Our vaccination rate was so high that we let our guard down. The second Christmas came, we were like, ‘We’re going to party!’”

The superspreader concert helped usher in an explosion of Covid-19 cases in Puerto Rico, which until then had been celebrating one of the most successful vaccination campaigns in the United States.

The concert was one of a series of business events, company holiday parties and family gatherings that fueled a 4,600 percent increase in cases on the island, a surge that public health officials worry could linger into the New Year; the Puerto Rican holiday season stretches to Three Kings Day on Jan. 6.

While the Omicron variant has besieged the entire country, it is especially worrisome in Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory already overwhelmed by government bankruptcy, an exodus of health professionals and a fragile health care system. Officials imposed a new wave of tough restrictions on travelers and diners in hopes of staving off the new wave of cases.

Rafael Irizarry, a Harvard University statistician who keeps a dashboard of Puerto Rico Covid-19 data, tweeted the daunting facts: A third of all coronavirus cases the island has recorded since the start of the pandemic occurred in the past month. The number of cases per 100,000 residents jumped to 225, from three, in three weeks.

In December, the number of hospitalizations doubled — twice.

Without the polarizing politics that have plagued the debate over vaccines in other parts of the country, nearly 85 percent of those in Puerto Rico have received at least one vaccine dose, and about 75 percent have gotten both shots.

But in the face of a highly contagious new variant, a high vaccination rate is not that meaningful anymore, Mr. Irizarry said.


Governor Demands Biden Allow Florida to Purchase Blocked COVID Treatments

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has long been a bit of an outlier on the national scene when it comes to COVID-19, erring proudly and loudly on the side of liberty in terms of vaccine and mask mandates. This has, unsurprisingly, put him in the crosshairs of the Biden administration on several different occasions, as the two spar over an issue of states’ rights.

The latest battlefield that these two governmental entities are meeting upon is that of monoclonal antibodies – some of the leading treatments of COVID-19 currently available.

Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., called for the Biden administration to allow his state to obtain more monoclonal antibody treatments as it encounters the omicron variant of COVID-19.

“We’re past the point now where we’re able to get it directly from any of these companies,” DeSantis said during a press conference on Monday. “The federal government has cornered the entire market. They basically took control of the supply in September.”

This is the latest in a disturbing trend that seems to have pit the federal government against the Sunshine State.

The governor’s press conference came nearly a week after his surgeon general, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, sent U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra a letter requesting the federal government restore distribution of monoclonal antibodies treatments to the state.

“The federal government is actively preventing the effective distribution of monoclonal antibody treatments in the U.S.,” Ladapo wrote. “The sudden suspension of multiple monoclonal antibody therapy treatments from distribution to Florida removes a health care provider’s ability to decide the best treatment options for their patients in this state.”

As Ladapo’s letter noted, HHS said in September that it would determine state-by-state distribution of certain drugs. An official reportedly said the move would “help maintain equitable distribution, both geographically and temporally, across the country.”

As of this writing, the Biden administration has not responded to Florida’s request or accusations.




4 January, 2022

'We'll be in the throes of Omicron for a month': Ex-FDA commissioner says COVID will peak in two weeks

The Omicron variant is continuing to create a surge in new COVID-19 cases through the United States in the new year, with former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb warning that we will be in the throes of the new wave in infections for the next month before cases drop off - even as the death rate remains relatively low.

The country recorded its highest seven-day average number of cases on January 2, with 413,304 people testing positive for the virus over the past week, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. At the same time, on a seven-day average, there were 1,350 new deaths. That number is far lower than the seven-day average recorded at the peak of winter in January 2021, where the US averaged around 3,300 deaths.

Cases may continue to rise over the next few days due to a lag in reporting over the weekend, and on Monday, Dr. Anthony Fauci told PIX 11 News: 'It is going to go higher.

'What we hope will happen is what we've seen in South Africa, you see a spike and then it turns around,' he said.

The country, which was one of the first in the world to fall victim to Omicron, hit its peak in the seven days leading up to December 17, when an average of 23,437 cases were recorded.

But by December 28, the number had plummeted by 38 percent to 14,390 cases.

Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the former FDA commissioner, also said on Monday that he believes 'this is not going to last very long,' estimating 'we'll be in the throes of this for maybe a month.'

'Here in the northeast, I think you're going to see infections peak out within the next two weeks,' he claimed in an interview on CNBC's Squawk Box. 'So hopefully, here in New York City does find a peak within the next two weeks.'

He said that London, which was struck by the Omicron wave several weeks before it came to New York City, 'has already peaked and is probably on the way down.' New York City saw 85,476 new cases reported in the state over the weekend, whereas London saw 19,951 on January 2.

Both Fauci and Gottlieb, as well as a number of other experts now say catching the highly-contagious Omicron variant could actually be beneficial to society, as it has been proven to be less virulent than other strains but could create herd immunity.

This comes after a study by Columbia University revealed that Omicron-fueled cases could peak to around 2.5 million by January 9 with others estimating the surge to go to 5.4 million.

Meanwhile, another covid variant has been found in France, according to scientists. The mutant strain has 46 mutations that are thought to make it both more vaccine-resistant and infectious than the original virus.

About 12 cases have been recorded so far near Marseille, with the first linked to travel to the African country Cameroon. But there is little sign that it is outcompeting the dominant Omicron variant, which now makes up more than 60 per cent of cases in France. It is yet to be spotted in other countries or labelled a variant under investigation by the World Health Organization.

In another interview with the Today Show's Hoda Kotb on Monday, former acting director of the Centers for Disease Control Richard Besser said he expects 'these next few weeks are going to be really rough in terms of numbers of new cases.'

Speaking to Danish TV 2, Tyra Grove Krause - the chief epidemiologist at Denmark's State Serum Institute - said a new study from the organisation found that the risk of hospitalisation from Omicron is half that seen with the Delta variant.

This, she said, has given Danish authorities hope that the Covid-19 pandemic in Denmark could be over in two months.

'I think we will have that in the next two months, and then I hope the infection will start to subside and we get our normal lives back,' she said on Monday.

Despite early fears that Omicron could prolong the pandemic due to its increased level of infection, Ms Krause said it actually could spell the end of the pandemic.

According to the study: 'Omicron is here to stay, and it will provide some massive spread of infection in the coming month. When it's over, we're in a better place than we were before.'

But while infection numbers in countries with the variant are soaring, the expert said that the highly infectious Omicron appears milder than the Delta variant, and therefore more people will be infected without having serious symptoms.

As a result, she said, this will provide a good level of immunity in the population.

Denmark has seen a spike in new cases in recent weeks, and on Sunday recorded its highest ever seven-day average infections, recording an average of 20,886 across the previous week, or 3,592.74 per million people - one of Europe's highest rates.

It reported its highest ever new infections on December 27 (41,035).

By comparison, the UK's seven-day average daily new confirmed Covid-19 cases per million people sits at 2,823.31 as on Monday, while in the United States, that number is 1,215.76 - lower than many countries in Europe.

Ms Krause stressed that there was still work to be done to beat the pandemic in the coming months, however.

'Omicron will peak at the end of January, and in February we will see declining infection pressure and a decreasing pressure on the health care system,' she said.

'But we have to make an effort in January, because it will be hard to get through.'

The epidemiologist said Danes should continue to follow the now well-known measures to help slow the spread, such as good hygiene, social distancing where possible, and staying at home when symptoms present themselves.

Omicron's increasing spread will continue to put pressure on Denmark's healthcare system, she said. 'This is definitely what will be the challenge in the future.'

Professor Lars Østergaard, chief physician at the Department of Infectious Diseases at Aarhus University Hospital, also looked towards the end of the pandemic in comments made on January 1.

He said that while the coronavirus will not be characterised as a pandemic forever, it will likely never fully disappear.

I never think we'll ever wave goodbye to the corona,' he said.

'But we want such a good immunity in the population - partly because of new vaccines, partly because people have been infected - that we can handle it as another of the infections we know that come especially in the winter month.'

Ms Krause agreed, saying: 'In the long run, we are in a place where coronavirus is here, but where we have restrained it, and only the particularly vulnerable need to be vaccinated up to the next winter season.'

But, he said, 'this could be the path out of this pandemic - as this variant spreads around and infects more and more people.

'Hopefully, the protection you get from having had an Omicron variant will provide some protection from other variants,' he continued, noting: 'The key, I think, is focusing on global protection. We have done a terrible job at providing vaccines around the globe and as we've seen with Omicron, new variants can arise anywhere.

'So from an equity and justice standpoint, we need to do more - but in terms of our self interest and being protected against future variants we need to do a lot more to make vaccines available.'

As of Monday, 9.2 billion people worldwide have received at least one dose of a COVID vaccine, and as of Thursday, 73.3 percent of all Americans have received at least on dose and 62 percent are fully vaccinated.

But just 33.4 percent of all fully-vaccinated Americans have received a booster dose, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control, as federal health officials consider changing the definition of 'fully vaccinated' to include booster doses amid a surge in children being hospitalized with the virus.

A Danish health official has also said that the Omicron variant is bringing about the end of the pandemic, saying 'we will have our normal lives back in two months'.

Speaking to Danish TV 2, Tyra Grove Krause - the chief epidemiologist at Denmark's State Serum Institute - said a new study from the organization found that the risk of hospitalization from Omicron is half that seen with the Delta variant.

This, she said, has given Danish authorities hope that the Covid-19 pandemic in Denmark could be over in two months.

'I think we will have that in the next two months, and then I hope the infection will start to subside and we get our normal lives back,' she said on Monday.

Despite early fears that Omicron could prolong the pandemic due to its increased level of infection, Ms Krause said it actually could spell the end of the pandemic.

According to the study: 'Omicron is here to stay, and it will provide some massive spread of infection in the coming month. When it's over, we're in a better place than we were before.'

But while infection numbers in countries with the variant are soaring, the expert said that the highly infectious Omicron appears milder than the Delta variant, and therefore more people will be infected without having serious symptoms.

As a result, she said, this will provide a good level of immunity in the population.

Denmark has seen a spike in new cases in recent weeks, and on Sunday recorded its highest ever seven-day average infections, recording an average of 20,886 across the previous week, or 3,592.74 per one million people - one of Europe's highest rates.

It reported its highest ever new infections on December 27, with 41,035 new cases.

As of Monday, the United States saw 254,091 new cases with just 244 new deaths. That number is likely to be higher due to a lag in reporting over the weekend.

But other experts have said that society is going to have to live with COVID, with Dr. Albert Ko, an infectious disease specialist at the Yale School of Public Health saying: 'Certainly COVID will be with us forever.

'We´re never going to be able to eradicate or eliminate COVID, so we have to identify our goals.'

At some point, the World Health Organization will determine when enough countries have tamped down their COVID-19 cases sufficiently - or at least, hospitalizations and deaths - to declare the pandemic officially over. Exactly what that threshold will be isn´t clear.

But even when that happens, some parts of the world still will struggle - especially low-income countries that lack enough vaccines or treatments - while others more easily transition to what scientists call an 'endemic' state.

They´re fuzzy distinctions, said infectious disease expert Stephen Kissler of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He defines the endemic period as reaching 'some sort of acceptable steady state' to deal with COVID-19.

The omicron crisis shows we´re not there yet but 'I do think we will reach a point where SARS-CoV-2 is endemic much like flu is endemic,' he said.

For comparison, COVID-19 has killed more than 800,000 Americans in two years while flu typically kills between 12,000 and 52,000 a year.

Exactly how much continuing COVID-19 illness and death the world will put up with is largely a social question, not a scientific one.

'We´re not going to get to a point where it´s 2019 again,' said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. 'We´ve got to get people to think about risk tolerance.'

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the top U.S. infectious disease expert, is looking ahead to controlling the virus in a way 'that does not disrupt society, that does not disrupt the economy.'

In his interview with PIX 11 on Monday, Fauci said that if people comply with the CDC recommendations and get a booster shot 'we will get through this quicker.'

Another Covid variant has been found in France, according to scientists.

The mutant strain has 46 mutations that are thought to make it both more vaccine-resistant and infectious than the original virus.

Some 12 cases have been spotted so far near Marseille, with the first linked to travel to the African country Cameroon.

But there is little sign that it is outcompeting the dominant Omicron variant, which now makes up more than 60 per cent of cases in France.

The strain was discovered by academics based at the IHU Mediterranee Infection on December 10, but has not spread rapidly since.

It is yet to be spotted in other countries or labelled a variant under investigation by the World Health Organization.

Professor Philippe Colson, who heads up the unit that discovered the strain, said: 'We indeed have several cases of this new variant in the Marseille geographical area.'We named it "variant IHU". Two new genomes have just been submitted.'

The variant has been dubbed B.1.640.2 and its discovery was announced in a paper posted on medRxiv. This has not been published in an academic journal.

Scientists say the lineage is genetically different to B.1.640, which is thought to have emerged in the Democratic Republic of Congo in September.

Tests show the strain carries the E484K mutation that is thought to make it more resistant to vaccines.

It also has the N501Y mutation — first seen on the Alpha variant — that experts believe can make it more transmissible.

It is a distant relative of Omicron, which scientists say likely evolved from an older virus.

Omicron — or B.1.1.529 — carries around 50 mutations and appears to be better at infecting people who already have a level of immunity. But a growing body of research proves it is also much less likely to trigger severe disease.




3 January, 2022

UK: My model has got it right on the Covid pandemic; and it tells me we don't need a new lockdown

By Philip Thomas, a Visiting Academic Professor at the University of Bristol

That alarm bells are ringing loudly in response to the rapid spread of the Omicron variant is no secret in Whitehall.

Civil servants are reportedly drawing up urgent plans for further restrictions and yesterday's emergency Cabinet meeting was perhaps a sign of things to come.

So far, ministers are resisting further Covid curbs, though Boris Johnson made clear that a clampdown was being held in 'reserve'.

Throughout the pandemic, ministers have frequently insisted that they 'follow the science' in their decision-making.

And a key ingredient of the mounting pressure for action being demanded in some quarters can be found in the guidance produced by the members of the consistently doom-laden Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), whose oft-criticised modelling has been central in the development of official policy over the past two years.


Their latest document is typically grim, with its claim that there could be 6,000 deaths a day in a new Covid wave, more than three times higher than the peak daily toll last January (when we didn't have mass vaccination) and equating to 180,000 deaths a month, more than we've seen the entire pandemic.

Despite these arguably hysterical numbers leading bulletins, Sage does concede that this represents their 'worst-case scenario' if the Government sticks to Plan B and imposes no further measures.

Yet even with that caveat, we should all be deeply concerned about Sage's modelling.

Doubts about the reliability of Sage's figures are hardly new, but scepticism will have only been increased following the remarkable Twitter exchange between Fraser Nelson, the editor of the Spectator magazine, and Professor Graham Medley, chair of Sage's modelling committee, over the weekend.

Puzzled by the gap between the reassuring reports from South Africa and Sage's dark forebodings, Nelson asked Medley how the group's conclusion was reached.

If, as the South Africans think, Omicron is mild and there is no need for lockdown, why didn't Sage include this scenario 'given that this is a very plausible option that changes outlook massively', asked Nelson. Simple enough.

But then came Medley's telling reply: 'Decision-makers are generally only interested in situations where decisions have to be made.'

Does Sage exclusively model bad outcomes that require further restrictions and omit more welcome outcomes for which no action would be required, even if such scenarios are just as likely to occur, Nelson wondered?

Then came the hammer blow: 'We generally model what we are asked to model,' Medley replied.

It was an extraordinary exchange and hardly how most people expect scientific advice to be provided.

In reaching its decisions, surely the Government needs to know the likelihood of all scenarios rather than just an outline of the worst possible cases?

Those who advocate a return to lockdown to halt the transmissibility of Omicron, for instance, ignore the wider impact of such a drastic measure on the economy, the backlog of other NHS treatments, mental health, domestic abuse and education.

The latest Government figures, published this month, show Britain's GDP is still 0.8 per cent lower than it was before the pandemic.

Without a strong economic rebound, it's probable that more people will be killed by the financial consequences of lockdown restrictions than ever died with Covid.

Even the more limited restrictions of Plan B are having a devastating effect on the hospitality trade, the travel industry and the entertainment sector.

Once again there is a clamour for the Chancellor Rishi Sunak to produce a rescue package out of thin air to tide businesses over this fraught winter, even though he has already spent more than £400 billion of taxpayers' money on support programmes, with debts that will saddle future generations to the tune of £2.2 trillion.

We have, of course, known about Omicron for less than a month and it would certainly be foolish to be too dismissive of its potential impact.

But nevertheless, a counter-weight must be offered against Sage's gloom. I can do that through the mathematical model I developed at Bristol University (the Predictor Corrector Covid Filter, or PCCF) which has proved a highly accurate forecaster of the progress of the pandemic.

Early in the new year, active Omicron infections may reach two and a half million, which added to the slowly declining Delta infections will generate a combined total peak of 3.5 million cases.

But while that number sounds huge, it does not necessarily spell the disaster that Sage has outlined.


I predict that Omicron's rise will be very fast — as seen already in London — but that will equate to a decline at almost the same speed, so that active infections are likely to be below where we are now in a month's time, and set to fade away as we move into spring.

That outlook is backed up by evidence from South Africa, who are a month ahead of us, where the National Institute of Communicable Diseases estimates that the fatality ratio (the percentage of those infected dying) is less than half the level it was for the Delta wave last winter, and more than four times lower for the particularly vulnerable 70 to 79-year-olds.

The relative mildness of the new strain is confirmed not only by the fact that hospital stays are much shorter for Omicron patients — around three days as opposed to 11 for Delta patients — but also that fewer such patients need oxygen or intensive care when in hospital.

That does not mean we will have it easy. The PCCF model indicates that deaths will certainly rise above the current level of 100 per day.

But even so, they are unlikely to go beyond 500 a day in England. This total, of course, represents a very significant number of individual tragedies, but is far below the daily peak of over 1,800 UK-wide deaths last January.


In the same vein, according to the PCCF, hospitalisations may reach around 3,000 per day, higher than the current rate of 800 but still below January's peak of 4,100 — a number that was achieved during a full national lockdown, and which was considered not to have overwhelmed the NHS.

Indeed, my modelling predicts numbers will remain manageable without the introduction of any further Covid curbs.

As I say, we cannot be complacent, but nor should we fall into despair or panic. I see no justification for further restrictions, let alone another lockdown, whatever Sage propounds.

The Government is right to see the booster programme as our main defence, just as we should also put our trust in the good sense and self-restraint of the British people.

Those who are vulnerable or risk-averse are already adjusting their behaviour without the need for more bureaucratic edicts. We all want to have a good Christmas, after all.

We must remember, too, that an uptick in respiratory deaths and hospitalisations is normal for winter.

Give in to the doom-mongers yet again, and we risk being trapped in a relentless cycle of authoritarian controls.

Normality beckons if the Government continues to hold its nerve, keep to the pragmatic path and refuse to be bullied into fearful measures by modelling that is predicated on exaggerated fears.


Compilation of nurse whistleblowers

The world has been embroiled in the most devastating public health crisis in more than a century. COVID-19 has disrupted the entire world.

It has been a catastrophe. However, the deadliness of COVID-19 has been made exponentially worse by terrible policies. Medical bureaucrats have lied and misled so often, they’ve lost the trust of the people they were entrusted to protect. These policies are even killing people.

Lockdowns have created a global catastrophe aside from what the virus caused. An entire generation of children has been harmed by unnecessary school closures. Even a vaccine critical to saving the lives of the elderly and immune compromised has been abused.

Nurses have been on the COVID frontline since day one. They have seen it all firsthand. These dedicated healthcare professionals have been heroes. However, they have consistently reported some harsh realities that mainstream media ignore.

A recent video compilation from nurses worldwide sheds a disturbing light on the potential adverse side effects caused by the COVID vaccine. Like anything which goes contrary to the bureaucratic narrative, these concerns are being buried.

However, Gateway Pundit compiled a series of video interviews with nurses from around the world. Every one of these healthcare professionals spoke candidly. Many have either quit or gotten fired. What they openly share is shocking.

One former nurse from Canada reported watching elderly patients being held down against their will and vaccinated. She witnessed full-term miscarriages within days of getting a COVID shot. Nurses reported elderly patients showing up sick with COVID days after getting vaccinated.

Other nurses shared about how people were never tested for COVID, despite showing profound symptoms, until after they died. Many nurses nearly came to tears during their testimony. In addition, some bemoaned how hospital administrators harassed them over vaccine mandates.

Paramedics and other healthcare workers also shared alarming concerns towards vaccine mandates and the safeness of the COVID vaccine itself. RN Collette Martin answered questions from Louisiana State Representative - Health and Welfare Committee chair Larry Bagley.

The 17-year veteran RN strongly cautioned against the COVID vaccine for children. She also stressed that adult reactions to COVID vaccine side effects are being ignored. However, she admonished medical professionals for ignoring these dangers arising in vaccinated children.

These dangers far outweigh any advantages. Children are now more prone to dying from vaccine complications than they are from COVID. Martin continued to express her concern about what is an obvious cover-up of vaccine related dangers.

She insisted that thousands of patient deaths are a direct result of the COVID vaccine, not the virus. Martin insisted that an alarming percentage of these deaths are not being reported to the Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS).

She indicated that many of her fellow nurses do not even know what VAERS is. Medical bureaucrats informed her that the VAERS database is a poor determiner of vaccine side effects. Like many in her field, Martin wanted to know why.

These complicit medical bureaucrats had no viable answer. Another healthcare worker from a U.S. hospital stressed that the numbers of COVID vaccine-related deaths on VAERS has doubled within the last nine months. These are the ones being reported.

This shocking revelation is even more disturbing when we consider reports that a huge bulk of vaccine-related deaths is not being reported. The more we hear from these brave healthcare professionals, the more frightening are the conclusions.

A virus leaked out of a virology lab in Wuhan, China. This lab received funding, deviously funneled through U.S. channels, using taxpayer money. The lab was practicing dangerous gain-of-function research on deadly coronaviruses. Safety protocols at the lab were horrific.

It is a scam. It is criminal. We’re barely one year from the official release of the COVID vaccines. Thousands have died from the shot already. As years pass, how many more health crises will be experienced




2 January, 2022

Crooked statistics about vaccination status

False statistics and misinformation are being used to push the baseless narrative that most COVID-19 hospital patients are unvaccinated.

On Friday, September 17, the CDC published a study that refutes the common claim that Covid-19 is a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” Coauthored by more than 50 MD’s and Ph.D.’s, the study contains data on the vaccine status of adults hospitalized with Covid-19 at 21 U.S. hospitals across 18 states during March to August of 2021.

Contrary to assertions from the Associated Press and Anthony Fauci that fully vaccinated people comprise only 1% of those being hospitalized or killed by C-19, the study found that 13% of patients hospitalized with C-19 had been fully vaccinated. Moreover, that 13% figure is just the tip of iceberg because the authors excluded from their study a large group of hospitalized C-19 patients, the bulk of whom were likely vaccinated.

About half of the omitted group and 27% of the C-19 patients in these hospitals were people with “immunocompromising conditions,” such as cancer, HIV, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, scleroderma, and Crohn’s disease. In the words of an FDA official and 18 other coauthors published in a medical journal, “immunocompromised individuals” were “prioritized for early immunization” and are “plausibly more likely to be offered and seek vaccination” because they are highly vulnerable to C-19.

On September 21, Just Facts asked Dr. Wesley Self, the lead author of the study, to release the data on the vaccination status of the C-19 patients with immunocompromising conditions. He has not replied.

The authors of the CDC study also excluded another 25% of all people hospitalized with C-19 because they were partially vaccinated, “received a Covid-19 vaccine other than Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, or Janssen [J&J],” or “received doses of two different Covid-19 vaccine products.”

Accounting for all of the C-19 patients in these hospitals, including those the authors excluded, a majority may have been fully or partially vaccinated against Covid:

Filling the gap left by vagueness of the CDC’s study, a precise measure of the vaccine status of people who died from the Covid-19 Delta variant is available from the United Kingdom, where the government keeps detailed healthcare records on nearly all citizens. Relevantly, the U.S. and UK have very similar C-19 death rates and had roughly equivalent vaccination rates over the period of the CDC study.

In the UK from February through August 2021, 62% of all Covid-19 Delta variant deaths were among the fully vaccinated. This amounts to a conclusive majority in a dataset with virtually every death included.

Seeing Through False Statistics

The story behind the talking point that Covid-19 is “a pandemic of the unvaccinated” is a textbook case of how false statistics are born and proliferate. Hence, it provides valuable insights about the dangers of blind trust and how to recognize deceitful rhetoric.

Late in June 2021, the Associated Press published an article titled, “Nearly All COVID Deaths in US Are Now Among Unvaccinated.” Written by Carla K. Johnson and Mike Stobbe, it was republished or cited by more than 100 media outlets and so-called fact checkers like PBS, Snopes, Bloomberg, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times,, Yahoo News, and WebMD.

The article claims the AP conducted an “analysis” that found only 1.1% of all C-19 hospitalizations and 0.8% of C-19 deaths in May were due to “breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated people.” While using those decimal points that convey a false sense of precision, the authors slipped in this craftily worded admission: the AP calculated these rates based on “figures provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” but the CDC has not published such rates due to “limitations in the data.”

Those limitations, in the words of the AP, include the reality that “some” states are “more aggressive than others in looking for such cases.” The word “looking” is a coy way of saying that the states don’t have a comprehensive system to count these deaths, a fact that throws the entire analysis into doubt.

With a subtle nod to that reality, the AP confesses that the “data probably understates” the number of vaccinated people who died from Covid-19. Compare that softly worded disclosure to the CDC’s explicit warning that its data on breakthrough infections “relies on passive and voluntary reporting, and data might not be complete or representative.” On August 25, the CDC strengthened that language to make clear that the “data are not complete or representative.”

Put simply, the AP’s statistics are meaningless because they are based on materially incomplete data. That was evident from the outset from a close look at the AP’s methodology, and it is now undeniable given the CDC study and UK data detailed above. Again, these indicate that fully vaccinated people comprise about 50% of all Covid-19 hospitalizations and deaths, not 1% as reported by the AP.

Nevertheless, Fauci appeared on the July 4th edition of NBC’s Meet the Press with Chuck Todd and parroted the AP’s bogus stat without mentioning any of its caveats. “If you look at the number of deaths,” declared Fauci, “about 99.2% of them are unvaccinated. About 0.8% are vaccinated. No vaccine is perfect. But when you talk about the avoidability of hospitalization and death, Chuck, it’s really sad and tragic that most all of these are avoidable and preventable.”

As Fauci uttered this misinformation, Todd, the political director of NBC News, never expressed a hint of skepticism. Acting like a mouthpiece instead of a journalist, Todd ended the segment by praising Fauci for “focusing” on his job and this “massive success story when it comes to vaccines and what this government-led effort did.”

Instead of correcting the AP and Fauci for misrepresenting CDC data, the director of the CDC, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, amplified it. During a July 16th White House press conference with Fauci by her side, Walensky stated that “over 97 percent of people who are entering the hospital right now are unvaccinated” and that Covid-19 “is becoming a pandemic of the unvaccinated.”

In turn, media outlets acted as megaphones for Fauci and Walensky without a word of critical analysis. This involved reports from the likes of ABC News, NPR, The Hill, CNN, Politico, Rolling Stone, USA Today, The Guardian, and the Washington Post, as well as three separate articles from the New York Times.

The Times later conducted its own analysis using the same ruse as the AP, reporting that fully vaccinated people were only 0.1% to 5% of Covid-19 hospitalizations across 40 states since vaccinations began. Buried near the end of the story, the Times revealed that it calculated these rates by lumping C-19 patients “with unknown vaccination status” into the “data for individuals who were not fully vaccinated.”

One week later, the Times began walking back those claims. On August 17, it alleged that reports from seven states with “the most detailed data” indicate that “breakthrough infections accounted for 12 percent to 24 percent of Covid-related hospitalizations.”

Despite those larger figures—which are still far removed from reality—the Times did not correct any of its earlier articles touting figures of 1% to 3% accompanied by quotes like this:

“The takeaway message remains, if you’re vaccinated, you are protected,” said Dr. Celine Gounder, an infectious disease specialist at Bellevue Hospital Center in New York. “You are not going to end up with severe disease, hospitalization or death.”


The most glaring lesson from this affair is that people entrusted to protect and inform the public are untrustworthy. Government officials with prestigious credentials and prominent media outlets repeatedly misreported the facts of this simple matter with life-or-death consequences. Thus, it is crucial to learn and apply proven methods to sort out the claims that surround important issues.

Secondly, Covid-19 still poses a considerable risk to some fully vaccinated people because a vaccine is only as good as each person’s immune system. Vaccines don’t directly attack virulent microbes in the same manner as antibiotics or anti-viral medicines. Instead, vaccines trigger people’s immune systems to react more quickly than usual and kill pathogens before they can do harm. If a person’s immune system is compromised by factors like poor general health, old age, obesity, immunosuppressing drugs, or lack of sleep, a vaccine will be less effective or ineffective.

Also, the currently available C-19 vaccines create an immune response to only one part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (the “Spike” protein). This produces narrower immunity than exposure to the actual virus. In accord with this fact, a study in Israel that has not yet undergone peer review has found that the Pfizer vaccine is much less effective in protecting against the Delta variant than naturally acquired immunity.

Third, none of the above means that C-19 vaccines are ineffective. Randomized controlled trials, which are the gold standard for determining clinical efficacy, have found that the C-19 vaccines significantly reduce the odds of having a bout of severe Covid-19. The Pfizer vaccine, for example, reduced the odds of severe C-19 by 71% to 100% for people who were not immunocompromised over a period of six months. Whether or not this protection lasts and if the benefits exceed the harms will be the subjects of upcoming article


Doctors with covid-19 put early at-home treatment to the test

Two physicians who are leading the charge on early at-home COVID-19 treatment to reduce hospitalization and death, have themselves become infected with the virus and following the regimen they, themselves preach

Two physicians who are leading the charge on early at-home COVID-19 treatment to reduce hospitalization and death, have themselves become infected with the virus and following the regimen they, themselves preach.

The surprise announcement of their illnesses came during an October 27 webcast by Peter McCullough, M.D., a public health expert, researcher and cardiologist at the Baylor Heart and Vascular Institute in Dallas, Texas, was scheduled to discuss the COVID treatment algorithm he helped design and was published August 7 in the American Journal of Medicine. During the presentation, McCullough revealed he was currently sick with the virus and is following his own protocol.

“I fully expect to have a prompt recovery, to return to work and avoid the risk of hospitalization and death,” said McCullough.

Moderator Jean-Pierre Kiekens then brought in another champion of early at-home treatment to the discussion, Brian Tyson, M.D., a family physician in California. Tyson said, he too, tested positive with the virus, and felt remarkably better after two days of the at-home regimen.

Physicians Avoiding the Hospital

McCullough said he tested positive the day before his presentation but showed symptoms several days earlier. The day before his test result came back, McCullough said he began treatment for his particular cohort in the algorithm, a patient over age 50 and with two or more pre-existing conditions (asthma, heart disease).

McCullough’s home regimen consists of the anti-viral drug, Ivermectin (IVM), the antibiotic, Azithromycin, zinc, vitamin D, an increase in his daily dose of aspirin for mild heart disease, and plenty of fresh air to avoid re-inoculation. If his symptoms don’t improve in 5 days, McCullough says he will start taking prednisone.

Tyson said he also used IVM in his treatment and noticed a huge improvement in symptoms on day two. “It is still lingering a little, bit. It’s more like a head cold, but the IVM seemed to really knock it out,” said Tyson.

The IVM and the antibiotic are “off label” use, meaning, they have been approved for other illnesses, not for COVID-19. Both physicians looked well, but tired, and McCullough sneezed a few times and sounded congested. McCullough said he ran six miles, four days earlier.

The Case for Early Treatment

There are four pillars to controlling a pandemic, stated McCullough, but the media and public health authorities focus on only three of them, with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s presentation on the Yale Global Health Network October 26, being a case in point. “The entire message was contagion control, shelter in place, and wait for a vaccine. There was no mention of early home treatment.” Incidentally, Fauci’s presentation on Zoom was standing room only, McCullough’s presentation had 57 participants.

People are going to get sick with COVID-19 if they haven’t already, said McCullough. “Early home treatment can be the only method for reducing hospitalizations and death once an individual gets sick. The hospital should only be a safety net for survival. It should not be the first place of treatment” said McCullough. McCullough says the U.S. should follow what India and Brazil have done and make available at-home COVID-19 treatment kits.




1 January, 2022

Pathology Reports Show Systemic Autoimmune Response from Covid-19 Vaccination

Recent pathology reports from Germany show that covid-19 vaccines can trigger self-destructive processes that lead to debilitating illness and death. The organ that is most often affected is the heart. Which makes covid-19 vaccines a new cause of heart disease. Since heart disease is the main subject of this website it is important that this new cause of disease is documented here.

In order to understand the significance of these pathology reports we have to first discuss the basics of how the covid-19 vaccines damage the body.

Covid-19 vaccination disease relates to the spike proteins. Spike proteins are found on the surface of SARS-CoV-2. These spike proteins allow the virus to penetrate host cells and cause infection.

The mRNA vaccines contain mRNA created in a laboratory. The mRNA tells the body’s cells to make spike proteins. Our bodies recognise these spike proteins as a threat and the immune system is activated.

The spike protein generated via the mRNA vaccines is described by the CDC as “harmless”. The theory, of course, is that the “harmless” spike protein stimulates the body so that it is better prepared to cope with the real virus. However, there are two fundamentally important flaws in this theory, and not enough people are talking about these flaws. In essence, the vaccines induce immunity in the wrong place and in the wrong way.

The vaccines invade the lymph nodes and the bloodstream and produce an immune response in those parts of the body. However, the virus itself enters the mucous membrane of the airways. This is the reason why the vaccines only protect against severe disease but do not prevent infection or the transmission of the virus. Only in severe covid-19 cases does the virus pass beyond the membrane of the airways and into the bloodstream - where it has the opportunity to encounter vaccine-induced immunity.

Confirmation of this can be found in a recent article published in Nature, the most respected science journal in the world:

“While the currently approved vaccines induce systemic immune responses, they probably do not evoke mucosal immunity in form of mucosal, secretory immunoglobulin A (IgA) or tissue-resident memory T cells (TRM)”

Other discussions about the lack of mucosal immunity from the vaccines have also recently appeared on Science Daily from the University of Buffalo and Ohio State University.

"We think it is a serious omission to ignore the mucosal immune response to SARS-CoV-2, given its initial sites of infection," said Michael W. Russell, PhD, emeritus professor, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences at University of Buffalo.

Although most people are aware that any protection offered by the covid-19 vaccines is temporary - only lasting four to six months, it is fair to assume that most people lining up for their third or fourth shot are unaware that the vaccine does not offer immunity at the site of infection.

The second flaw relates to the fact that once the vaccines enter the body they start a colossal civil war.

In the bloodstream, the mRNA gene goes to the inside wall of the blood vessels. The cells in the blood vessel wall then produce spike proteins. Within hours or days of being injected with the vaccine the immune system will scratch at the inside wall of the blood vessels in order to try to remove the cells that are now producing the spike proteins.

The gene from the mRNA vaccine also invades the lymph nodes and triggers a civil war between the cells that make the spike proteins and the lymphocytes whose job it is to kill cells that make those spike proteins.

After the first dose of the vaccine there will be varying degrees of damage caused by this civil war, but the second dose of the vaccine causes even more damage, since the second dose is likely to trigger an even bigger immune response. Something that is considered desirable by covid-19 vaccine proponents. This could explain why it is more common for people to experience greater adverse reactions after the second dose than the first dose. Something that is acknowledged by the CDC

However, it is important to be aware that this greater immune response takes the form of direct tissue damage. The scratching at the inside wall of the blood vessels becomes more intense since any cells that dare to make the spike protein will be attacked by the immune system.

Of course, if the person receiving the vaccine has a strong immune response, then the potential exists for greater damage to the inside wall of the blood vessels. This could explain why people below 60 years of age (who have stronger immune systems) are more likely to experience adverse effects from covid-19 vaccines.


Once the mRNA has escaped it can enter the cells of any of the internal organs such as the liver, the spleen and the heart. Once inside these organs the covid-19 vaccine gene will continue to make spike proteins. This will trigger the body’s killer lymphocytes to carpet bomb and destroy those tissues that have spike proteins. This is an auto-immune response. The body starts destroying its own internal organs in order to stop the propagation of the spike proteins.

At the same time, the supply of lymphocytes is eventually reduced because they themselves are fighting their own civil war within the lymph nodes - where the gene for the spike protein has also invaded. Eventually, there is an immune deficiency of lymphocytes. This could have implications for the prevention of tumors. Normally, the lymphocytes will keep the cancerous cells under control and prevent tumors, but if large quantities of lymphocytes are destroyed by the vaccine gene and the autoimmune response to the spike protein, then there will not be enough of them to prevent cancerous cells from propagating.

According to Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi (see footnote for credentials) this general immune deficiency could have longer-term implications for viruses such as herpes and shingles, which are always trying to take hold within the body but are normally suppressed by lymphocytes.

So, once the gene from the vaccine has escaped through the wall of the blood vessels it has the potential to cause system wide effects by triggering an autoimmune response in all of the organs of the body. The most definitive way to find out if this is actually happening is to perform an autopsy.

Professor Arne Burkhardt is a pathologist who has taught at the Universities of Hamburg, Berne and Tübingen (full credentials in the footnotes). Professor Burkhardt was able to conduct post-mortem examinations on 15 people who died after receiving covid-19 vaccinations.

The microscopic evaluation of the tissues showed an autoimmune attack on multiple organs. The most frequently affected organs were the heart (fourteen of fifteen cases) and the lung (thirteen of fifteen cases). Pathologic alterations were furthermore observed in the liver (two cases), thyroid gland ( two cases), salivary glands (two cases) and brain (two cases).

For example, the two images below show the microscopic evaluation of the small blood vessels of the heart. The endothelial cells that line the blood vessels have been heavily attacked and are inflamed.

Professor Arne Burkhardt in an interview said that in his forty years of experience he had not seen anything like these combinations of killer T lymphocytes throughout the body.

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi and Professor Burkhardt have published an article summarising these findings on the Doctors for Covid Ethics website. They conclude:

“Histopathologic analysis show clear evidence of vaccine-induced autoimmune-like pathology in multiple organs. [This] must be expected to very frequently occur in all individuals, particularly following booster injections…

Beyond any doubt, injection of gene-based COVID-19 vaccines places lives under threat of illness and death. We note that both mRNA and vector-based vaccines are represented among these cases, as are all four major manufacturers.”

We do not know how many people have died or been seriously injured as a result of taking the covid-19 vaccines. Some reports have suggested that less than 1% of vaccine adverse effects are actually reported.

It seems obvious though that coercing people to take third and fourth booster shots is a terrible idea. If an individual person survived two shots of a covid-19 vaccine without inducing autoimmune organ damage, can they survive a third shot or a fourth? It is important to note that most of the people in this pathology report who died after vaccination, died at home or in the car. Presumably unaware of the damage that was taking place inside their body?

And how many shots does it take before the person’s immune system is compromised in general and the person becomes susceptible in the longer-term to other viruses and cancer?

Scientists in Israel who are members of the government's advisory panel raised this alarm recently, as the government seems intent on pushing for a fourth booster shot. These scientists warned that the plan could backfire, because too many shots might cause a sort of immune system fatigue, compromising the body’s ability to fight the coronavirus. According to the New York Times and Japan Times.

During the last two years many countries have seen the enforcement of a number of illogical rules. The authorities have been intent on trying to enforce further lockdowns and vaccine shots. The lockdowns ravage economies and the shots ravage our bodies.

Not to mention the fact that there has been a much safer and more effective option available all along - early treatment. As discussed in my previous article.

It might be difficult for some of us to accept that our governments and health authorities could get things so wrong (either by design or through incompetence), however, I think we have to keep in mind that these are the same authorities that spent tens of billions of dollars lowering peoples’ cholesterol levels even though people live longer and healthier with higher cholesterol and advises people with type 2 diabetes to eat more grain based foods that disrupt blood glucose levels. Not to mention the numerous drug scandals such as Vioxx that killed more Americans than the Vietnam War, and the opioid scandal that has so far killed more than 400,000 people in the United States alone.


A Brand New Study Suggests The Omicron Variant Will Mean the End of Covid as We Know It

The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 has spread across the world like wildfire. But the mutant Covid-19 virus, although highly transmissible, has not brought with it the high death counts of previous waves, such as the Delta variant.

Instead, the effects of Omicron have been described as “generally mild,” and comparable to the Common Cold. Even an initial reported single case of a Texas man having died from the Omicron variant has been thrown into question.

One of the mysteries of the Omicron variant is why the reaction appears to be so consistently mild, regardless of vaccination status. There has been a lot of questioning about whether prior infection to Delta and wild variants has provided some antibody response to Omicron, which can cause infections even in those who have been vaccinated and “boosted.”

The Africa Health Research Institute has undertaken an innovative study to look into whether there is any transferrability of natural immunity between the Omicron and Delta variants. The lead author in the pre-print study submitted for publication, Alex Sigal, spearheaded a team of over thirty researchers revealed the promising preliminary results.




For the notes appearing at the side of the original blog see HERE

Pictures put up on a blog sometimes do not last long. They stay up only as long as the original host keeps them up. I therefore keep archives of all the pictures that I use. The recent archives are online and are in two parts:

Archive of side pictures HERE

Most pictures that I use in the body of the blog should stay up throughout the year. But how long they stay up after that is uncertain. At the end of every year therefore I intend to put up a collection of all pictures used on the blog in that year. That should enable missing pictures to be replaced. The archive of last year's pictures on this blog is therefore now up. Note that the filename of the picture is clickable and reflects the date on which the picture was posted. See here

My Home Pages are here (Academic) or here (Personal); My Home page supplement; My Alternative Wikipedia; My Blogroll; Menu of my longer writings; My annual picture page is here; My Recipes;

Email me (John Ray) here.