Medical Tyranny

[sharon sanders]

A wide review of all of the anti-vaccine theories. Basically many of the anti-vaccine sources are cited in the above essay. There are dozens of claims in the essay. It is the mirror of reading some of the pro-vaccine "don't worry be happy" propaganda. The agenda is so strong that I blur over a lot of the stated items. Frankly, some of the claims are unbelievable because COVID-19 is still a new disease. We have no idea what the long terms effects of the disease are - or the vaccines. For instance, in the essay the author states as a fact that natural immunity is "most likely" life long from a COVID-19 infection. From the article:

"Natural immunity is far superior to vaccine immunity and is most likely lifelong."

No one knows for certain how long natural immunity lasts. In fact, in my own family I know it is not life long as several of my relatives had at least two COVID-19 bouts within 18 months. I wish that a course of COVID-19 would give life long immunity but wishing something is not a fact.

Also, I don't know about the CDC doctors, but I know that most of the W.H.O. affiliated doctors have treated patients as many of them are currently in the field in their own countries and they are loaned out to the W.H.O. for projects/outbreaks. From the article:

"..but rather individuals and bureaucracies that have never treated a single patient—including Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, EcoHealth Alliance, the CDC, WHO, state public health officers and hospital administrators."

While the basic premise of the essay is that we are all controlled is true, in my opinion this essay is so biased in its tone that many who are pro-vaccine will simply disregard it immediately. This is ashame because people should read and learn about differing views.

I find the best convincing arguments have a limited use of adjective and adverbs. Let the facts speak for themselves in a non-emotional presentation.

[GardenSpider]

NIH Scientists Pocketed $350 Million in Royalties — Agency Won’t Say How Much Went to Fauci

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/nih-scientists-millions-royalties/

Between fiscal years 2010 and 2020, more than $350 million in royalties were paid by third parties to the National Institutes of Health and its scientists. Dr. Anthony Fauci received 23 royalty payments, but the NIH has yet to disclose the sum total of those payments.

[GardenSpider]

Biden Handing Over U.S. Sovereignty to WHO

by Peter Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin

Please take seriously the severity of this existential threat to everything free people hold dear. Do everything in your power to pass this report on to others and to find ways to communicate with and to influence people to stop empowering WHO to take over our national sovereignty and freedom.

https://breggin.com/article-detail/post_detail/Biden-Handing-Over-US-Sovereignty-to-WHO

On May 22-28, 2022, ultimate control over America’s healthcare system, and hence its national sovereignty, will be delivered for a vote to the World Health Organization’s governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).

This threat is contained in new amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations, proposed by the Biden administration, that are scheduled as “Provisional agenda item 16.2” at the upcoming conference on May 22-28, 2022.¹

These amendments will empower WHO’s Director-General to declare health emergencies or crises in any nation and to do so unilaterally and against the opposition of the target nation. The Director-General will be able to declare these health crises based merely on his personal opinion or consideration that there is a potential or possible threat to other nations.

If passed, the Biden Administration’s proposed amendments will, by their very existence and their intention, drastically compromise the independence and the sovereignty of the United States. The same threat looms over all the U.N.’s 193 member nations, all of whom belong to WHO and represent 99.44% of the world population.²

These regulations are a “binding instrument of international law entered into force on 15 June 2007.”³ U.N. members states can be required by law to obey or acquiesce to them.

How It Became Official

More....

[sharon sanders]

The fact remains that the W.H.O. has no enforcement power. They can not force any government to do anything. The U.S. and China, and...and...and...will do what is in their best national interest - bottom line - no matter what the W.H.O., U.N., World Trade Org., etc. mandate. Imagine the W.H.O. declaring a major disease emergency in China despite China's protest - how much $ will China then pay into the W.H.O.... right...nothing....same with the rest of the countries....so....

fyi - In this pandemic the U.S. did not wait for the W.H.O. to officially declare a pandemic before taking action.

Added note - please realize that many people are exploiting every issue they can so that they can raise $ for their newsletter, pamphlet, website clicks, etc. Please use at least two sources for your information - and use your common sense.

[Emily]

And don't forget where the real money is going: https://www.goldmansachs.com/insight...o-endemic.html
Their products are being forced on people in many countries.

[Emily]

https://karlstack.substack.com/p/fleeing-the-trudeau-regime?s=r

Fleeing the Trudeau Regime
An open plea for asylum to any country willing to take me

Chris May 14

It may (or may not) surprise you to learn that I am unvaccinated. Long-time readers of Karlstack would not be aware of this fact because I have never written anything about Covid or vaccines before — vaccination status is a private medical decision, and I try to not be vocal, preachy or smug about it. I also find this topic (Covid) very boring and overdone. I just want to move on with life.
The apparatchiks who sit in the Canadian parliament, however, refuse to let me move on with my life; they are dragging this out beyond any semblance of rationality, hence why I am writing this article. The libs have pushed me to my absolute breaking point.

'You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.'
— Leon Trotsky

They still won’t let me board planes. They won’t let me board trains. They won’t let me cross borders. I am trapped here indefinitely in an open-air prison; I may as well be living in Eritrea...

[Emily]

Here are the proposed WHO amendments as they stand today. The only part I support is the demand for more transparency from WHO. Let them prove they can do that before granting even more authority to them.

https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA75/A75_18-en.pdf

[Emily]

Just the facts from a mainstream source - it is a passport, no matter how it is rebranded, based on accepting an injection that has only personal health value for some but does nothing to significantly control disease spread. And it is only the beginning.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/global-pulse/2022/02/24/who-vaccine-passports-00011144

WHO making moves on international vaccine 'passport'
By DANIEL PAYNE
02/24/2022 10:00 AM EST
With help from Ben Leonard and Erin Banco
BUILDING A ‘TRUST FRAMEWORK’ — The World Health Organization will convene member states and leaders of Covid-19 immunization credential technology groups to recognize different vaccine certificates across nations and regions, a top Vaccination Credential Initiative official told POLITICO’s Ben Leonard.

TheWHO is bringing together the groups to develop a “trust framework” that would allow countries to verify whether vaccine credentials are legitimate, said Brian Anderson, chief digital health physician at MITRE and a co-founder of the VCI.

Why it matters: The effort would aid international travel by allowing proof of vaccination to be more easilyshared and verified, Anderson said. Many countries and regions have different standards for proof of inoculation, creating confusion for travelers and officials.

“It’s piecemeal, not coordinated and done nation to nation,” Anderson said. “It can be a real challenge.”

The WHO would say only that news on the topic should be coming “soon.”

The VCI is behind SMART Health Cards, which have become the de facto standard for digital vaccine credentials in the U.S., with dozens of states developing or adopting the technology. The group will participate in the initiative.

It’s unclear whetherthe U.S. would participate. The White House and the Departments of State and HHS didn’t respond to requests for comment...

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/states-vaccine-passports-covid-00010802

By Ben Leonard
02/23/2022 04:30 AM EST

Several Republican-leaning states that eschewed so-called vaccine passports over concerns that they limited freedom are now embracing the technology behind them so that their residents can travel and get their immunization and health records online.
The technology — which allows proof of Covid-19 vaccination to be digitized and often includes a QR code — had been touted by supporters, largely in Democratic-leaning states, as a way to facilitate safer reopening after pandemic-related shutdowns.
...

“We’re starting to see some jurisdictions that had a very strict stance, ‘We’re not going to put any QR codes on anything,’ look at this again with fresh eyes and say, ‘Okay, this really isn’t a passport. This is really just an evolution of a record moving into the digital age,’” said Rebecca Coyle, executive director of the American Immunization Registry Association. “A paper record that moves into a digital or paper format provides some additional security.”
.
...
Even outside of Covid-19, Coyle says that technology like SMART Health Cards can enable more seamless data sharing for things like school immunization requirements and travel.

“The utility will be probably largely seen after the pandemic,” Coyle said. “We’ll continue to see how it evolves during the pandemic, but the future and long-term benefits are still there.”

[sharon sanders]

China.

[GardenSpider]

Here is a fascinating and salient interview with Professor Francis Boyle from the University of Illinois.

Francis Boyle: We Are in a War Against the Scientific Elite, This is WWIII
https://geopoliticsandempire.com/202...c-elite-wwiii/

Francis Boyle discusses how the U.S. and China collaborated on the development of the COVID-19 gain-of-function bioweapon. The elites in both Beijing and Washington have more in common with each other than with their own people due to their totalitarian mentality. The mandates are a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code and constitute a crime against humanity (e.g. murder, extermination, inhumane acts committed against civilians). Governments are persecuting their own citizens just like the Nazi government persecuted German Jews. We are seeing a Nazi mentality at work by all governments enforcing these frankenshots, the Nazi philosophy of “useless eaters” and depopulation. It is impossible to create a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 if it is a bioweapon. The biowarfare simulations are war games that go live and monkeypox is another bioweapon released just as voting is underway to give WHO totalitarian powers and set up a global medical police state and tyranny. In his book he argues principles of international law that can be used internationally to try and stop this. We are seeing a war against humanity by the scientific elite, this is World War III.

About Francis Boyle
Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He received an AB (1971) in Political Science from the University of Chicago, then a JD degree magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, and AM and PhD degrees in Political Science from Harvard University. He practiced tax and international tax with Bingham, Dana & Gould.

Professor Boyle serves as counsel to Bosnia and Herzegovina and to the Provisional Government of the Palestinian Authority. He also represents two associations of citizens within Bosnia and was involved in developing the indictment against Slobodan Milosević for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Over his career, he has represented national and international bodies including the Blackfoot Nation (Canada), the Nation of Hawaii, and the Lakota Nation, as well as numerous individual death penalty and human rights cases. He has advised numerous international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and bio-warfare. From 1991-92, he served as Legal Advisor to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations.

Professor Boyle served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International, as a consultant to the American Friends Service Committee, and on the Advisory Board for the Council for Responsible Genetics. He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, that was approved unanimously by both Houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush.

[Emily]

https://thehighwire.com/videos/medical-board-goes-after-dr-mccullough-sen-johnson-calls-for-public-hearing/

MEDICAL BOARD GOES AFTER DR. MCCULLOUGH, SEN. JOHNSON CALLS FOR PUBLIC HEARING


Dr. Peter McCullough is under fire from the American Board of Internal Medicine (A.B.I.M.), who is threatening his medical license for “providing false and inaccurate information to patients”. Senator Ron Johnson has responded with a call for A.B.I.M. and Dr. McCullough to participate in an open hearing on Capitol Hill, and put it all on the table of public record.
#ABIM #RonJohnson #McCulloughHearing
POSTED: June 17, 2022

[GardenSpider]

Unbelievable.... Dr. McCullough is a hero. He came up with a treatment protocol that saved thousands of lives. He dares speak truth to power and challenge authority. This is clearly not about public health. If it was, he would be lauded for his genius innovations in medicine that have healed.

[Emily]

Agreed.

[Emily]

https://www.portugalresident.com/pro-children-movement-launches-appeal-against-any-further-mass-vaccinations-against-covid-19/

Pro-children movement launches appeal against any further ‘mass vaccinations’ against Covid-19
By Natasha Donn-
20th June 2022

Movement lobbies Supreme Administrative Tribunal ‘before babies are targeted’

The Movement for Children and Teens in the Pandemic has launched an appeal this week against any further mass-vaccinations against Covid-19.
The gist of the message directed at every parent, as well as the judges of the Supreme Administrative Tribunal, is that a position must be taken legally before babies are targeted with vaccines that still only have “conditional approval” and are without the full gamut of “security and efficacy” testing.
“We are not giving up!” the appeal begins before presenting its case in emotive terms which, surprisingly, have barely been touched on by the national media.
The truth is that the movement’s initial attemps to bring a moratorium on child vaccinations was brutally quashed, within hours of presentation of a so-called Class Action.
Since then, the movement has battled with appeals, to the point that the matter will now be considered by the Supreme Administrative Tribunal.
Hopes are that parents dubious of the benefits of submitting children to these new vaccines will lobby the court themselves.

The English translation can be read here:
...
“The unprecedented number of adverse reactions to Covid-19 vaccines, registered by the main pharmacovigilance systems (Portuguese, European, American, British, World Health Organisaiton) – including serious adverse reactions and death – have been systematically undervalued by health and media authorities.

“Meantime, contact with real-life cases which are quietly becoming known, has shown there are people suffering irreversible consequences from these vaccinations (including so-called ‘serious adverse reactions’). Many have witnessed deaths of family members after taking them.

“It is shocking that those who live in the climate of fear that has been inflicted on them believe these collateral effects to be legitimate – even for the common good. Are they really for the common good? Have vaccines prevented death, transmission and serious illness? Where are these studies? Why is data hidden from the public?

“Victims of these vaccines feel the weight of shame, for having allowed themselves to be carried away by the propaganda machine, financed as it was so that a cult to vaccination was started, and rights, freedoms and guarantees were exchanged for a brief and elusive sense of security.

“They still live in fear, a lot of fear, because they feel in their skin, through physical and emotional pain, how far political decisions can go.

“Everyone allowed this. We refer to those who could have done something – those with academic and scholastic advantages, who occupy the right positions in which to analyse that what was being imposed could be unconstitutional and arbitrary. All were complicit in destroyed lives which were not the work of chance.

“Victims blame themselves – because they went (to vaccination centres) on their own feet… they feel they were their own executioners because they adhered to measures dictated by the DGS (health directorate), the ministry of health and the Portuguese government.
...

“The pandemic has shown a totalitarianism emerging… and the most extraordinary thing is that it seems to have been accepted by the majority of Portuguese who, instead of fighting for their rights, liberties and guarantees, for democracy and sovereignty, seem to be asleep. Anyone who wants to confront are dismissed as “ists” (negationists/ conspiracy theorists) and suffer harsh penalties of segregation and coercion”.

The movement continues its background story: “The appeal (of the first judicial ruling) went to the Central Administrative Court of the South which ruled that it was useless. Yes, useless… because all children would be vaccinated, ‘even if some were not’. All, even if some were not. That’s what was said!...

[GardenSpider]

FDA Caught Creating and Using Unreliable and Inconsistent Data to Create An Illusion of COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy as They Attempt to Justify Approval for Use in Infants and Toddlers

https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/fda-caught-creating-and-using-unreliable

Urgent Action Item Below.

As promised, the FDA has ginned up a report that ostensibly will be used to try to justify “approval” (whatever they mean by that now) of COVID-19 vaccines for infants and toddlers (children < 5 years old). Here’s the report for your reference.

This report comes after a torrent of massive reports from Moderna and Pfizer that claim to review studies of the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in children. It is not hard to see what shenanigans the FDA has been up to to try to bolster a vaccine that fewer and fewer adults want. It’s more of the same: exaggerate the apparent risk of the virus and minimizing the perception of risk. In other words, lies.

1. There is no evidence of clinical urgency. Infants and toddlers (and children in general) do not get COVID-19; they do not (yet) die from COVID-19. All that can change when antibody dependent enhancement kicks in for the vaccinated. FDA’s own reports cites 1,086 deaths “from COVID-19” and 10,700,000 “cases” of COVID-19 in children aged 0-17. There have been 832 days since April 1, 2020 when diagnoses started for COVID-19. For the entire population of children in the US (73,000,000), the risk of COVID-19 infection since the onset of COVID is 10,700,000/73,000,000 = 0.14657. The risk of a child dying if they have a diagnosis is 1,086/10,700,00 or 1086/10700000 = 0.00010149532. The risk of any child dying of COVID-19 over this time period is 1,086/73000000 = 0.00001487671. The per-day risk is on the order of 1.78806611e-8 (0.000000001788). There is no real unmet clinical need and the FDA needs to go back to college to understand how to use RT-PCR correctly. Children do not get COVID-19, and they do not die.
2. Inconsistent use of the idea “vaccinated”. This has been the pattern from the very first study. FDA, CDC, Moderna, Pfizer, and others pull out whatever definition of “vaccinated” they want. Examples: “Vaccinated” is defined in the original trials as people who received both doses and who did not develop COVID-19 before two weeks passed after the second exposure to the vaccine. In fact, that means that people who developed COVID-19 due to disease enhancement were dropped from the study calculations. First, this is the first time people were dropped from a vaccine trial for getting infected with the pathogen targeted by the vaccine up to 13 or 14 days after being vaccinated. Second, it’s actually five entire weeks - one month and one week - 44 days - after the first exposure. ALL of the vaccine efficacy being cited by FDA is suspect. Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines never achieved >90% true vaccine efficacy; the best estimate is more like 75%.
3. Inconsistent use of the idea “vaccine efficacy”. Over the time period since the first COVID-19 vaccine trials, various definitions of “vaccine efficacy” have been used. Decreased transmission. Reduction in infection rates. Reduced hospitalization. Presence of neutralizing antibodies. Presence of antibodies. All are used and cited in FDA’s report whenever convenient, all in an ad-hocmanner. It’s more than irritating. It’s moving the goal post and represents reckless (and ineffective) attempts to manipulate public perception. This practice continues in the reports and studies that are cited by FDA. I do not trust the efficacy data FDA cites in their report (why would we given Point 1?).
   
   Further evidence of the futility of the evidence used to claim efficacy comes from Moderna’s Sponsor Briefing report to the FDA:

-more...

[sharon sanders]

These comments are inaccurate: "Infants and toddlers (and children in general) do not get COVID-19", "Children do not get COVID-19"
If children are in a household that is undergoing an active COVID-19 infection in adults, they are exposed. Are they symptomatic? Maybe not - hence the claims of non-infection. Being a mother I know something about infectious disease transmission. No amount of argument will persuade me that children are not vulnerable at home and school regarding infectious diseases. Period.

We know COVID-19 can be transmitted to animals (cats & dogs) from infected adults. Do the children share air with the adults? COVID-19 is airborne.

The type of statement quoted above diminishes the "anti-vaccine" crowd. This is disappointing because they have some really valid points. When I see comments similar to this (like the continuous claim that COVID-19 immunity from a natural infection is life long - which it is not), it is a big turn off. The read becomes a chore. Some of the important facts like the low deaths rate become less obvious because - now - instead of an easy read - I have to scrutinize every single sentence of this presentation.

I recommend that an argument be an easy read. Stick to known and proven facts to state your case. Do not extrapolate or make claims that are unproven or defy common sense.

fyi - I feel this way about papers/comments/opinions that support vaccination too. I have been very vocal about infectious disease risk in schools for example.

[GardenSpider]

Consider for a moment they are correct. The math is compelling. And as to the second point, the definition of vaccinated continues to change, as does "vaccine efficacy." All contingent on whatever suites the current narrative.

I think the real disconnect comes from people who are vaccinated coming to terms with having been lied to about the safety of the shots. It's so clear (given the current data on death and injury post vaccination), but yet hard to see. That's because the buy-in is really great--life itself is on the line. It's scary to think the shot can produce harmful effects far into the future, or kill quickly, especially when people believed they were safe. It's angering. It's maddening. No one wants to believe it could be true. It must be an anti-vaxx myth. But keep in mind, people like me are not anti-vaxx. I've had them all. But this one is different from the rest. This one is dangerous. Perhaps articles like this one that make bold declarations that infants and toddlers do not get CoVid makes it easy to dismiss it. Because it seems like such an obvious blunder. But look at the math. The numbers are so small. It would suggest that risk of children getting CoVid is negligible. So why bother pushing a shot on babies without safety data? Everyone should object to that. We will see children, innocent children and infants dying and becoming disabled from the shot. As we have already seen in adults. We have to stop believing the lie. Pushing this shot is a crime against humanity.

"For the entire population of children in the US (73,000,000), the risk of COVID-19 infection since the onset of COVID is 10,700,000/73,000,000 = 0.14657. The risk of a child dying if they have a diagnosis is 1,086/10,700,00 or 1086/10700000 = 0.00010149532. The risk of any child dying of COVID-19 over this time period is 1,086/73000000 = 0.00001487671. The per-day risk is on the order of 1.78806611e-8 (0.000000001788). There is no real unmet clinical need and the FDA needs to go back to college to understand how to use RT-PCR correctly. Children do not get COVID-19, and they do not die."

[sharon sanders]

The most compelling data for children is the low death rate. A death is something concrete to evaluate. As to the low case numbers. Well...common sense will tell you that since children are human mammals and adult human mammals and animal mammals in households have been infected with COVID-19 easily, children living in the same household have been infected too - probably on a large scale that has never been adequately measured. So use the death figures.

In general, why take any medicine if you will not get very sick if infected with the illness? This is a valid argument. Don't ruin it with a bunch of marginal claims.

For instance, I almost never take any pain medicine for anything. I usually wait it out. For me taking a nap works great for a headache. This year I did not get the flu vaccine. Not a position statement - I just forgot - and it was not a priority for me. I haven't been around people much and I always wear an N95 mask indoors when I am in public. My chance of dying or getting any serious complication from the seasonal flu was almost zero.

I think everyone knows that people sell stuff in pandemics, and where there is $, there is incentive to lie, cheat, steal....governments, corporations, book sellers, suppliers, etc.

Read all you can. Talk to your medical practitioner. Do not take medical advice from the internet.

Use at least two sources for your information, and.....

Use your common sense.

[sharon sanders]

FDA Caught Creating and Using Unreliable and Inconsistent Data to Create An Illusion of COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy as They Attempt to Justify Approval for Use in Infants and Toddlers

https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/fda-caught-creating-and-using-unreliable

Urgent Action Item Below.

As promised, the FDA has ginned up a report that ostensibly will be used to try to justify “approval” (whatever they mean by that now) of COVID-19 vaccines for infants and toddlers (children < 5 years old). Here’s the report for your reference.

This report comes after a torrent of massive reports from Moderna and Pfizer that claim to review studies of the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in children. It is not hard to see what shenanigans the FDA has been up to to try to bolster a vaccine that fewer and fewer adults want. It’s more of the same: exaggerate the apparent risk of the virus and minimizing the perception of risk. In other words, lies.

1. There is no evidence of clinical urgency. Infants and toddlers (and children in general) do not get COVID-19; they do not (yet) die from COVID-19. All that can change when antibody dependent enhancement kicks in for the vaccinated. FDA’s own reports cites 1,086 deaths “from COVID-19” and 10,700,000 “cases” of COVID-19 in children aged 0-17. There have been 832 days since April 1, 2020 when diagnoses started for COVID-19. For the entire population of children in the US (73,000,000), the risk of COVID-19 infection since the onset of COVID is 10,700,000/73,000,000 = 0.14657. The risk of a child dying if they have a diagnosis is 1,086/10,700,00 or 1086/10700000 = 0.00010149532. The risk of any child dying of COVID-19 over this time period is 1,086/73000000 = 0.00001487671. The per-day risk is on the order of 1.78806611e-8 (0.000000001788). There is no real unmet clinical need and the FDA needs to go back to college to understand how to use RT-PCR correctly. Children do not get COVID-19, and they do not die.
2. Inconsistent use of the idea “vaccinated”. This has been the pattern from the very first study. FDA, CDC, Moderna, Pfizer, and others pull out whatever definition of “vaccinated” they want. Examples: “Vaccinated” is defined in the original trials as people who received both doses and who did not develop COVID-19 before two weeks passed after the second exposure to the vaccine. In fact, that means that people who developed COVID-19 due to disease enhancement were dropped from the study calculations. First, this is the first time people were dropped from a vaccine trial for getting infected with the pathogen targeted by the vaccine up to 13 or 14 days after being vaccinated. Second, it’s actually five entire weeks - one month and one week - 44 days - after the first exposure. ALL of the vaccine efficacy being cited by FDA is suspect. Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines never achieved >90% true vaccine efficacy; the best estimate is more like 75%.
3. Inconsistent use of the idea “vaccine efficacy”. Over the time period since the first COVID-19 vaccine trials, various definitions of “vaccine efficacy” have been used. Decreased transmission. Reduction in infection rates. Reduced hospitalization. Presence of neutralizing antibodies. Presence of antibodies. All are used and cited in FDA’s report whenever convenient, all in an ad-hocmanner. It’s more than irritating. It’s moving the goal post and represents reckless (and ineffective) attempts to manipulate public perception. This practice continues in the reports and studies that are cited by FDA. I do not trust the efficacy data FDA cites in their report (why would we given Point 1?).
   
   Further evidence of the futility of the evidence used to claim efficacy comes from Moderna’s Sponsor Briefing report to the FDA:

-more...

Please see comments in the post above.

-----------------------------------------------------------

To James Lyons-Weiler:

Children DO GET COVID-19. If you want people to fairly evaluate your points - do not present information, as fact, that defies common sense. It calls into question your entire argument.


From the UK government - (My bolding in red).

Most school pupils in England had COVID-19 antibodies by March 2022

27 June 2022


Almost all primary and secondary school pupils in England had detectable levels of coronavirus (COVID-19) SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in March 2022.

Adjusted antibody data from the Schools Infection Survey, for March to April 2022, showed that more than 99% of secondary school pupils had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, comprised of 64.9% who were vaccinated and 34.4% who were unvaccinated.

For primary school pupils, 82.0% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, based on adjusted figures. This is comprised of 0.4% who were vaccinated and 81.6% who were unvaccinated. (This means they had antibodies due to natural infection. s.s.)


High levels of antibody positivity among secondary school children were driven by both vaccination and natural infection


more...

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19/latestinsights#pupils

[Emily]

I believe children can be infected, but not all positive antibody tests are proof of infection, rather than passive antibody transfer. See: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...443v1.full.pdf

I bet a lot of those asymptomatic animal studies using PCR and antibody tests were misleading, too.

[Emily]

https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/18/fauci-wife-authors-paper-supporting-vaccine-pressure-campaigns/

U.S. Bioethics Chief, Who Happens to be Fauci’s Wife, Published a New Paper Telling Corporates They Can Ethically ‘Pressure Employees’ And ‘Embarrass Vaccine Resistors.’

The paper comes hot on the heels of a number of White House losses regarding federal worker vaccination and mask mandates.
Anthony Fauci’s wife – who is also head of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center – authored a paper defending the ethics of corporations “pressuring employees to get vaccinated” and “embarrass[ing] vaccine resistors.”

The study – “The Ethics of Encouraging Employees to Get the COVID‑19 Vaccination” – was funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center and the National Human Genome Research Institute and counted Christine Grady, Fauci’s wife, amongst its authors.

Published in March 2022, the paper followed attempts by the White House as well as Democratic Party politicians across America to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for federal and state workers.

Grady’s paper focuses on the “ethics of encouragement strategies aimed at overcoming vaccine reluctance (which can be due to resistance, hesitance, misinformation, or inertia) to facilitate voluntary employee vaccination.”
...

While discussing vaccine mandates, the paper posits they can “be ethically appropriate” if there is “clear articulation about the consequences of not complying with the policy.”

“In that circumstance, employees have a choice between getting vaccinated or accepting the consequences of a choice to remain unvaccinated,” it explains.

Grady outlines other tactics employers could use to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates within their company, such as sharing “targeted statistics (such as 75% of the company or unit have been vaccinated) to spur competition or even implicitly embarrass vaccine resistors.”

“There can be social consequences associated with peer communication about vaccination, such as stigma and ostracization of those not vaccinated,” the paper asserts...

Bullying is bad advice, and it is never ethical, even if Covid vaccines significantly prevented disease transmission, which they don't. Hopefully we taxpayers can't be sued because we pay government employees to give advice that could result in personal harm or business financial losses.

https://lawkm.com/workplace-bullying/

Bullying In The Workplace: Examples And What You Can Do

Unfortunately, bullying doesn’t stay in middle school, and bullying in the workplace has become a hurtful trend. The trouble with bullying is that it’s often indistinct or quietly manipulative. Even though we’re no longer in middle school, we still have to deal with bullies. They can be in your workplace, a boss or a coworker, and their bullying techniques have sometimes become subtler but maybe just as, or more, damaging.

Workplace bullying may not be as obviously illegal as any other type of workplace assault; however, the effects of workplace bullying can be detrimental to the work environment and the victim’s health. Workplace bullying kills productivity. Beyond that, these interactions decrease company morale and increase employee turnover. These employee actions can cost many company dollars in work completed and training new workers.

On the individual employee level, bullying negatively impacts the victim’s job, health, and overall career. Since bullying can be sly, it’s often hard to recognize. Companies have been known to sugar coat the situations of workplace bullying in fancy or weak terminology to belittle the problem...

[GardenSpider]

Wuhan Laboratory Found to Have Conducted Novel Monkeypox Research One Year Before Global Outbreak

https://beckernews.com/new-covid-19-origins-oversaw-monkeypox-research-at-wuhan-lab-one-year-before-global-outbreak-45076/

In a scientific article in Virologica Sinica, the official journal of the Chinese Society of Microbiology, the authors explained the process for artificially engineering a monkeypox virus. The journal article was submitted by researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Center for Biosafety Mega-Science, the State Key Laboratory of Virology and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It was published by Editor-in-Chief Professor Zheng-Li Shi, who is the Director for the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Zheng-Li Shi, also known as the “bat woman,” has been deeply implicated in the suspected lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that may be traced to the ongoing worldwide Covid-19 outbreak. The New York Times, in a 2021 article, profiled Dr. Shi and highlighted doubt that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is blameless for the origination of the novel coronavirus pandemic. Years later, those doubts still linger about the Wuhan lab, fueled in part by the Biden administration‘s inability to issue a definitive statement on the matter.

In the journal article, the authors discuss the Transformation-associated recombination (TAR) process for assembling large DNA constructs, such as monkeypox viruses. The authors highlight the dual-selection system of synthesizing DNA sequences, which “has proven beneficial for TAR cloning” but “has never been applied to TAR assembly.”

“In this study, we added the PADH1-URA3 cassette to pGF as a negative selection marker and explored whether the dual-selection system could be applied in TAR assembly,” the authors state while using technical language.

“Monkey poxviruses (MPXVs) are large DNA viruses… As a member of the Orthopoxvirus genus in the family Poxviridae, MPXV is subdivided into the West African and Congo Basin clades,” the authors then state. “The latter is more pathogenic and has been reported to infect humans in various parts of the world,” the article adds.

“For MPXV [monkeypox] detection, Li et al. reported that the C3L (complement-binding protein) gene could be used as the qPCR target for the MPXV Congo Basin strain,” the authors add. “Since MPXV infection has never been associated with an outbreak in China, the viral genomic material required for qPCR detection is unavailable.”

-more...