A story that started percolating last summer began to accelerate by September and has now reached absurd levels. Over the summer, people started sounding the alarm after five young, healthy doctors in the Toronto area suddenly died. By the beginning of September, that number was up to 32. Today… it’s 80. Canada is seeing an unprecedented die-off of medical staff that began after dictator Justin Trudeau required them all to get a COVID booster shot – the third shot in a series.
Dr. William Makis MD is now sounding the alarm about this in Canada. He’s a highly credentialed physician and cancer researcher with more than 100 peer-reviewed papers on his resume and was the head of the largest cancer treatment program in North America at the University of Alberta. He’s not some quack.
Makis sent a letter to the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) back in September when just 32 doctors had died in Canada. At the time, he asked the CMA to look into why so many young and healthy doctors – almost all of them under 50 – were suddenly dying across the country. Makis scolds the CMA for completely ignoring what appears to be a catastrophic problem.
His team put together a database recording all of the doctors who died in the period from 2019 through 2022. The number of doctors under age 50 who have died in 2022 alone is more than twice the number that died in 2019 and 2020 combined. The number of doctors under 40 who died is 5 times as high. And the number of doctors under age 30 is 8 times higher this year than in 2019 and 2020 combined.
This is consistent with what most COVID shot skeptics have been saying for nearly two years now. The younger and healthier a person is, the more likely this new, untested mRNA technology is going to do serious harm to their immune and cardiovascular systems.
You’d think that an eight-fold increase in the number of doctors under 30 dying would make someone stand up and pay attention. But the CMA has not opened an investigation. Nor has it responded to the letters from Dr. Makis, and it has yet to respond to any requests from journalists for a statement on this. How can you just have 80 doctors up and die in rapid succession, and then ignore it?
Doctors are some of the healthiest people in most societies, including Canada. Have you ever seen a fat doctor? They’re slender and healthy, and med school typically scares them into avoiding cheeseburgers for the rest of their lives. But here we are with a sudden, massive die-off of these healthy people in an advanced Western country.
Many of the deceased doctors who have been identified were also amateur athletes. They competed in marathons and triathlons. Several have died from sudden cardiac arrest while out for their morning jog.
It’s obvious why so many doctors are suddenly dying. It’s no coincidence that this phenomenon started immediately after the rollout of the third sequential shot. In the rare instances where autopsies have been performed on bodies that have died from vaccination, coroners have found advanced heart disease in patients with no previous heart disease, and necrotic encephalitis – dead brain cells. Both the heart and brain have clusters of spike proteins from the vaccines.
This has to stop. But unfortunately, the people who could stop it are constantly running in and out of the revolving door between Big Pharma and government health agencies. Pfizer and Moderna pretty much own the CDC here in the US and the CMA in Canada. Too bad about the doctors. Maybe more people will start to wake up when there are no more doctors left to administer the shots.
A worldwide diabolical attack on the family and the human person is afoot, and it draws its power in part from twisting Scripture to accomplish its ends.
I was scrolling though Instagram recently when I came across a post from a Christian woman with 165,000 followers explaining how excited she and her husband were to have a “transgender” child. She detailed why they had changed their daughter’s name to Max and now referred the girl using the pronouns “they” and “them.” She also expressed joy that the child was able to live out her “God-given” identity and gave an extensive justification for her decision based on supposed “transgender” animals found in nature.
But what really caught my eye was what followed: a defense of transgenderism based on Genesis 1:26: “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness.”
According to the author, the meaning of this biblical text is as follows. First, if “all things come from one Divine Being, then that being must encompass every sexuality.” Therefore, God is not male or female; the Trinity is nonbinary. Second, “God made absolutely every human being in ‘their’ image,” and since God encompasses all sexualities and uses “their” as a pronoun, humans can be nonbinary and use “their” as a personal pronoun as well. The author concludes, “If you see it differently, well . . . take your ‘concerns’ to God.” Either you “believe in the Genesis creation story” or you don’t.
It’s hard to overstate the depth of error here, or how dangerous and insidious this post is. There are two grave problems here, and they’re interconnected.
The first problem is the blatant evil of transgenderism. The transgender craze, which exploded in 2015 and is currently rampaging through our teenage girl population, is a Satanic attack on the human person, destroying hundreds of thousands of young lives. As detailed in new film Dysconnected, the trans phenomenon is an anti-body, anti-family, anti-God movement being pushed on us by a small group of rich and powerful ideologues who want nothing less than the overthrow of the divinely created order. They hate the notion of being created, so they model themselves after the serpent in the garden of Eden, whom they see as a hero of the biblical account.
These diabolical ideas have overwhelmed the medical, counseling, and educational systems and subverted the traditional purpose of these institutions. We now face a trans industrial complex that makes billions by funneling impressionable children into a vortex of puberty-blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgery, followed by a lifetime of medical treatment to deal with all the irreversible consequences and harmful side effects.
This is a sick and twisted ideology that we will look back on one day with horror, wondering why more people didn’t speak out. The author of the Instagram post is simply wrong about the trans issue, and she is subjecting her child to abuse at the hands of deceived and deceitful medical and psychiatric professionals.
The second, perhaps less obvious problem here is the twisting of Scripture. The root here is sola scriptura, the Protestant notion that “the Bible alone” is sufficient for doctrine and morals. What does this mean for us? Well, there is simply no possible way for an adherent of Bible Alone theology to authoritatively correct this woman. After all, it is her interpretation of Genesis versus everyone else’s. On what grounds could anyone choose a particular interpretation? None.
And so the Instagram mother, by quoting Genesis, tries to support “transitioning” in the name of God! She frames this issue as a holy crusade to defend, from Scripture, the “image of God” in humanity—ironically, and tragically, the exact thing the transgender machine seeks to destroy.
By supporting evil with scripture, this author increases the wickedness that will take place. Many Christian mothers and fathers will read her justification for “transitioning” and think they need to support it, too. Whereas once they might have been indifferent or silent about the trans issue (bad enough, but better than supportive), now they will enter the fray on the side of Big Trans, because the Bible tells them to. By giving the evil of transgenderism a divine mandate, she increases the movement’s power.
Unfortunately, this is how it always goes within a sola scriptura framework. As I explained in Twisted Unto Destruction: How Bible Alone Theology Made the World a Worse Place, not only did the Protestant Reformation unleash doctrinal and moral relativism, but it also gave people a tool whereby they could actively support sin using Scripture! As a result, we’ve had 500 years of increased wickedness, done in the name of the word of God.
There are many examples in American history. In Twisted Unto Destruction, the focus on three: sex, money, and power.
The trajectory is always the same. First, a sin becomes a strong temptation in the culture: slavery, avarice, consumerism, contraception, abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, etc. The initial response from Protestant Christians is to preach against it, as it transgresses traditional ethics. However, soon enough, someone seeks an alternative interpretation. Does the Bible really speak about this issue? And if it does, is it actually saying what we have always thought it said? After sowing doubt about the traditional understanding, then it is time to find verses that actively support the activity we used to call a sin. This is how we end up with pro-abortion billboards claiming to follow Jesus’ command to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31).
Regarding transgenderism, by 2016, the Washington Post had published an article by “bisexual Christian writer” Eliel Cruz, headlined “Where in the Bible does it say you can’t be transgender? Nowhere.” Earlier this year, an NPR headline read, “Trans religious leaders say Scripture should inspire inclusive congregations.” The Instagram post I read last week is just building on that foundation and following the same pattern. It happens every time. The Bible alone is not enough to stem the tide of evil; indeed, inevitably, a sola scriptura approach exacerbates the problem.
On the other hand, the Catholic Church is standing strong. Pope Francis affirmed that “the young need to be helped to accept their own body as it is created” (Amoris Laetitia 285), and the Vatican’s Congregation for Catholic Education published “Male and Female He Created Them” to guide Catholic Schools in standing against transgender ideology. You’ll see the Church holding fast on cultural controversies throughout history, from slavery and racism to contraception and homosexuality. That is not to say that individual Catholics haven’t passively supported or even actively taken part in these evils; the Church is full of sinners, but the institution of the Church nonetheless provides a solid foundation and means of accountability—up to excommunication for those who promote evil—that is simply unavailable within Protestantism.
We are facing a critical time in history. Transgender ideology is a powerful diabolical attack on the family and the human person, and it is being made worse by those who twist Scripture to support it. It will be up to courageous Catholics to stop this insidious sola scriptura process we’ve become so accustomed to seeing before it leads any more of our children to destruction.
The decidedly un-Catholic National Catholic Reporter recently ran an article by a young woman who has surgically “transitioned” to live as a man, who now goes by the name of Maxwell Kuzma. The enemy has deceived this beautiful young woman. As a father of three children, my youngest son is just a year younger than her age and my heart and prayers go out to her and to her parents. But the battle for truth and for souls requires us to challenge grave errors and heresies.
Satan is the father of lies, and lies are the inversion of truth. Because the devil cannot create anything on his own, he must invert and distort the truth in order to destroy God’s created order and thus snare souls. Catholics must look for examples of inversion to help us identify when the deceiver is at work.
Inversion #1: Arguments are “me”-centered, not God-centered
In authentic Catholic doctrine and thought, God is always at the center, and man conforms himself to God. He is the Creator, and we are the creatures. He knows how and for what purpose we are made, and our nature is his domain alone. Man is made in God’s image and not the other way around. When we place ourselves at the center, with God as a prop for our own feelings and experiences, we have inverted reality.
In Kuzma’s short article, I found 53 uses of the words I, me, and myself. By contrast, I found zero uses of the words God, Jesus, Spirit, Father, or Lord. I expected a lopsided ratio, but I did not expect zero.
We should expect an ostensibly Catholic publication, in running a discussion of or dissent from Catholic teaching, would include a reference to God. But God did not figure into this discussion, which makes sense if you understand inversion. The appeal here is not to God Almighty, his laws, and created order, but to self—to personal feelings and experience.
But with self instead of God at the center, why can’t anyone’s emotions or experience dictate morality? Adulterers, fornicators, gluttons, thieves, embezzlers . . . anyone at all should be able to remake the moral law in a way that feels comfortable. It’s true that we live in a culture where “LGBTQ” sins and temptations are somehow more special and protected than other sins and temptations, getting encouragement, even “reverence,” unlike the others. But there is no logical reason why the other sins could not also be considered “true” if man is the center and arbiter. When we invert the way we determine truth, we invert the truth, too.
Inversion #2: Sinners shaming the faithful as if the faithful were sinning
Though innocent, Jesus Christ was mocked, blamed, and falsely accused. Faithful Catholics are similarly scapegoated when they will not cooperate with grave sin. In this instance, Kuzma’s parents are painted as the bad guys, as sinners lacking love. They are, we are told, “cold and distant” because they would not accede to what their daughter wanted (emphasis mine):
I wanted my mom and my dad to be there with me at my doctor’s appointments. I wanted them to be waiting to pick me up after surgery, to take me home and feed me soup and put on my favorite movies. . . . I wanted my parents to use my name and pronouns and to celebrate me as their son.
Kuzma accuses her parents of “preferring dogmatic legalism over willingness to see the real me. ” But in fact, it is right order that Catholic parents would choose God and his Truth (“dogmatic legalism”) over destructive lies. Any right-thinking, godly parent would have no part in a beloved child’s mutilation. Authentic love refuses to go along with a lie.
Referencing “gender theory,” Pope Francis echoes Pope Benedict in saying, “We are living in an epoch of sin against God the Creator.” And the U.S. bishops warn that the “false idea” of transgenderism “compels people either to go against reason . . . or face ridicule, marginalization, and other forms of retaliation.”
Kuzma’s parents are victims of such retaliation. Increasingly, if a parent does not cave to a child’s emotional manipulation regarding irrational appeals—essentially putting creature over Creator—the parent will be cast as the sinner. We see this inversion everywhere now: parents are expected to “accompany” their child’s homosexual relationships, cohabitation, invalid marriages, abandonment of spouse, and “transitioning.” The sinners are seen as righteous, and the righteous are treated as sinners.
Inversion #3: Physical reality versus imagination
The lies of gender theory have no momentum unless we elevate imagination and emotion over what is tangible, scientific, and real. Kuzma is explicit in her admission that feelings determine reality: her physical body “did not ring true to me” (emphasis mine).
It should go without saying that no one is permitted a private “truth” about objective things. Truth is what corresponds to reality. The physical world that God created, that can be known by the senses, is reality. In an inverted reality, created things are suspect, and imagination holds the truth.
We know indisputably that, despite injected hormones and deforming surgeries, there is not one physical part of Kuzma’s being that is not intrinsically female, including the brain she believes is telling her she is a man. Every single one of the approximately 100 billion cells in her brain is stamped, indelibly, female. Any and all DNA before and after death will be female, and her resurrected body at the Final Judgment will, along with her united soul, be female.
I often ask LGBTQ advocates to show me where “gender” is found outside the imagination. No one has answered. “Gender” is not found in any measurable scientific, objective, or sensible thing. Imagination is subjective and forever “fluid,” often contradicting reality.
Feeling something, even deeply, does not make it so, just as believing something with conviction does not make it true. Truth is outside ourselves. It does not change with our desires, and we are not its arbiters.
If we reject God’s created order for imaginary “truths,” we are attempting to undo what God created in the Garden. In fact, that inversion is what I found when I clicked a link on Kuzma’s piece that led me to a “related article” by Jessica Gerhardt.
Inversion #4. Rejection of natural law for an “experiential” approach to morality
Gerhardt tells us, based on not a hint of Catholic teaching or understanding, that “trans-inclusive feminism is compatible with Catholicism.” She has made this up, by inversion.
Her bizarre claim requires that we reject natural law, which is foundational to Catholic thought. What is natural law? Natural law is the universal moral law of God, which is ascertainable by all men through the light of human reason alone. It asks the question, “What is this created thing, and what is its nature, its purpose (telos)?” This includes man and woman, and that began in the Garden. As the Catechism puts it, “the natural law expresses the original moral sense which enables man to discern by reason the good and the evil, the truth and the lie” (1954).
Gerhart discourages “clinging to Aristotelian natural law or gender essentialism” and encourages people to “expand their imagination, to allow for new categories” instead. After admitting that the pope calls transgenderism a sin against the Creator, she inverts it to a virtue, to “perhaps a way of becoming a more integrated, whole person.”
After all, she claims, Jesus taught more through “experiential knowledge” than he taught objective truth. Jesus, who is Unchanging Truth, and the history of his vicars beg to differ: Back in 1939, Pope Pius XII lamented the world’s “drift toward chaos” and blamed that chaos on “disregard . . . and forgetfulness of the natural law itself.” The chaos surrounding us today is exponentially worse (no one could have dreamed of the folly of “gender ideology”), as now natural law teaching is essentially non-existent. The abandonment of natural law truth for “experiential truth” is a dangerous inversion, because it’s become how we teach children—in the broader culture and, unfortunately, in large swaths of the Church.
Inversion #5: Twisting Scripture to mean its opposite
The devil has inverted Scripture to use against God for millennia, but in her article, Gerhardt twists Scripture in grotesque new ways.
In a huge translation overreach with no grounding in, or even appeal to, Catholicism, Gerhardt proposes that Adam can be “seen as nonbinary or intersex.” She quotes another author’s “alternative Catholic framework” (read: anti-Catholic idea) to pervert Matthew 5:27-30 beyond all recognition. Where Jesus says, hyperbolically, to cut off the body parts that cause us to sin lest we go to hell, the inverters have twisted this into Jesus’ approval of surgical genital mutilation and double mastectomies to escape the sex that God created us to be.
But the inversions get worse. Gerhardt uses the glorified, resurrected body of Christ as a confirmation of or affirming parallel to the scarred and mutilated bodies of the “transgendered,” arguing that the “holes” and “brokenness” of Christ’s resurrected body “challenge” and even overrule the “perfection” of God’s creation of Adam and Eve.
The idea that Christ’s selfless love through the wounds of his crucifixion gives permission to mutilate our bodies in defiance of our creation is a blasphemy. Christ gave not an ounce of his flesh or a drop of his blood for his own will or desire. There was no “me” in his sacrifice, which was undertaken for the redemption of our sins, not for their affirmation.
Ultimately, Kuzma and Gerhardt have conflated their own subjective feelings and desires with the truth. It is a shame and a scandal that a dissident “Catholic” publication has given their heresies a platform.
For us, the most important takeaway is the need for discernment among the faithful. We must look for inversions as red flags. If an attempt at persuasion is littered with inversions of our Faith, reject it, and turn away as if you are being seduced by the devil himself. Because you are.
If the COVID shots are as bad as they appear, why isn’t your doctor warning you about all their potential side effects, and instead, is encouraging you to get more shots?
If you’ve become disillusioned with the medical profession over the past three years, you’re not alone. Many have come to distrust doctors, largely thanks to widespread mistreatment of COVID in hospitals, and doctors’ failure to provide sufficient information about the COVID jabs to make informed consent. Doctors’ enforcing the use of masks, even though they ought to know they don’t work against respiratory viruses, hasn’t helped either.
In a recent interview with Steve Kirsch, Dr. Paul Marik, a pulmonary and critical care specialist and founding member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), discussed why doctors have been so reluctant to speak out against the clearly dangerous COVID shots. As noted by Kirsch:1
My blue pilled friends who believe the vaccines are safe have told me they would reconsider their position if just a single one of their own doctors came out against the vaccine. One of them said even if a ‘TV doctor’ (such as Sanjay Gupta) said it was unsafe, they would reconsider their position.
I told them that doctors are afraid to speak out because they will lose their ability to practice medicine if they challenge the mainstream narrative.
My friends find that too hard to believe. They asked me incredulously, ‘Why would the medical community silence doctors who are trying to save lives?’ They didn’t believe my answer. So, I wanted to interview a doctor who is very highly respected and who is not an ‘anti-vaxxer’ to explain it to them.
Doctors Who Share Their Concerns Are Punished
Like many other doctors, Marik took the COVID shots when they first came out, as was expected of him. It wasn’t until he started reviewing the data for himself, well after the fact, that he realized just how bad they are.
When asked whether he might have misjudged the data, Marik replies, “No, the evidence is very clear.” Yet despite crystal-clear data, when Marik started speaking out against the shots, the medical community retaliated. Marik also suffered retaliation when trying to treat patients with FDA-approved, off-patent, off-label drugs shown to be very effective against COVID.
The hospital pharmacy refused to fill his prescriptions and he was ordered to not prescribe them to anyone. In short, he was ordered to simply watch his patients die, even though he knew he could help them.
The only drug he was allowed to prescribe was remdesivir, which is known to be toxic and often lethal. Remdesivir was developed as an antiviral drug and tested during the Ebola breakout in 2014. The drug was found to have a very high death rate and was not pursued further.
In the early months of 2020, the drug was entered into COVID trials.2 Those trials were also beyond disappointing.345 Not only was the drug ineffective against the infection but it also had significant and life-threatening side effects, including kidney failure and liver damage.6
But despite its clear dangers and lack of effectiveness, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration still authorized remdesivir for emergency use against COVID in May 2020,7 and then gave it full approval in October 2020.8
How Hospitals Get Rid of ‘Troublesome’ Doctors
When Marik refused to follow the remdesivir protocol, he was subjected to “sham review,” an unofficial but well-known process in which a “troublesome” doctor is accused of wrongdoing and basically railroaded out of practice.
In the end, he was fired, even though he’s never had a single patient complaint in his 30-year career as a critical care specialist. But they didn’t stop there. The hospital administration also reported him to the National Practitioner Databank, and once you’ve been reported as a bad actor to the NPD, it’s virtually impossible to clear your name. Your career is over.
They also reported him to the Board of Medicine, which concocted another set of bogus charges against him. They accused him of prescribing ivermectin to fictional patients whom they falsely claimed were injured by the drug.
The truth is I was never actually able to prescribe ivermectin,” Marik says. “The patients they claimed I treated were nonexistent patients, so that tells you how far the Virginia Board of Medicine will go … This is the problem if you try to speak out. The [hospital administration] went out of their way to destroy my career because I wanted to treat my patients.
According to Marik, some of his colleagues who have gone against the narrative have even been physically threatened, and had the lives of their families threatened unless they stop talking. “So, this is serious,” Marik says. The fact of the matter is that doctors who argue against the Big Pharma narrative are a threat to trillion-dollar revenues. Compared to such sums, the value of a doctor’s life is nil.
Enormous Financial Incentives to Kill COVID Patients
Marik points out there were, and still are, enormous financial incentives for hospitals to not provide proper care to COVID patients. Those financial incentives also helped drive up the COVID death count early on in the pandemic. As explained by Marik, every COVID patient has what amounts to a $400,000 to $500,000 bounty on their head, as hospitals receive bonus payments for:910
Admission of a “COVID patient,” COVID testing and COVID diagnoses.
Use of remdesivir — According to Marik, the U.S. government pays hospitals a 20% upcharge on the entire hospital bill when remdesivir is used.111213
Use of mechanical ventilation, which Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services whistleblowers claim kill 84.9% of COVID patients within as few as 96 hours,14 typically due to barotrauma15 (trauma to the lungs from the elevated pressure).
COVID deaths — In August 2020, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Robert Redfield, agreed hospitals had a financial incentive to overcount COVID deaths.16
According to Marik, whether the patient lives or dies is irrelevant. In fact, if they die, there’s additional monies to be had. The hospitals basically see COVID patients as a cash cow, which is why they don’t tolerate doctors who use early treatment. As shocking as this is to some, it’s not the first time this has happened. Doctors were also paid to prescribe opioids, which contributed to the lethal opioid epidemic.
COVID Jab Injured Patients Desperate for Help
Just as Marik balked at health authorities’ recommendation to not offer early treatment — something completely unheard of until the advent of COVID — he also balked at the idea that patients were faking COVID jab injuries.
After the rollout of the shots, the FLCCC started getting calls from people who were desperate for help, as they suffered serious health problems shortly after their shots. Almost universally, their doctors had told them the shot couldn’t possibly be at fault.
Marik was not so sure, and once he began to really investigate the matter, he realized the data overwhelmingly showed there were serious problems. Marik is now so certain the shots are dangerous, he says he wouldn’t recommend it to a single living soul on the planet, and the FLCCC is now one of the few groups treating COVID jab injuries as well as COVID infection and long-COVID.
‘Unlearning Everything I Learned’
Marik’s professional experiences over the past three years have clearly resulted in a massive awakening to the fact that things have not been as they appeared. He says that in the past six months, he’s come to realize that he was essentially brainwashed by Big Pharma throughout medical school, and that much of what he learned was simply wrong.
He also realized you cannot trust medical journals. They too have been corrupted by Big Pharma. So, now, he’s in the process of unlearning the lies he was taught, and he’s starting anew, looking at health and disease with fresh eyes.
California Bill Seeks to Muzzle Doctors
The harassment and intimidation doctors have suffered under COVID is now cemented into law in California.17 California Assembly Bill 209818 designates “the dissemination or promotion of misinformation or disinformation related to … COVID-19 as unprofessional conduct” warranting “disciplinary action” that could result in the loss of their medical license.19
The bill was approved by the California Legislature September 26, 2022,20 and Gov. Gavin Newsome signed it October 1, 2022.2122
“Misinformation” is defined as anything that is “contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.” Misinformation or disinformation related to SARS-CoV-2 includes “false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”
“Who decides what is ‘scientific consensus?’ Presumably … it’s precisely those agencies and government actors who, ironically, have been wrong time and again throughout the pandemic.” ~ The Daily Signal
Basically, what all this means is that the state will dictate what misinformation is and isn’t, because rarely ever is there scientific consensus on anything. Even after decades of investigation, questions frequently linger, and new discoveries that upend old dogmas can come about at any time.
As noted by The Daily Signal,23 “Who decides what is ‘scientific consensus?’ Presumably … it’s precisely those agencies and government actors who, ironically, have been wrong time and again throughout the pandemic.” For examples, see their video below.
Science only moves forward when there is free exchange of ideas. By preventing doctors from sharing information and knowledge as they see fit with their patients, California bureaucrats are not only violating the U.S. Constitution and destroying the medical profession as we know it, they’re also pushing medical science back into the Dark Ages.
The Hunt for Truth-Tellers
I’ve written several articles over the past couple of years detailing the brutal and unethical treatment of medical professionals who have dared speak out against any part of the irrational COVID narrative.
Dr. Meryl Nass, for example, was stripped of her medical license and ordered to undergo psychiatric evaluation — all for the “crime” of successfully saving the lives of COVID patients using hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
The three authors included Harvard professor of medicine Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., Oxford professor Sunetra Gupta, Ph.D., and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School.
One of the tactics Fauci used against them was to claim scientific consensus — that most all scientists agreed with lockdowns, masking, social distancing and so on — even though there were just as many, if not more, who disagreed. At the time, more than 46,400 medical practitioners and 15,700 scientists had signed the Declaration.
As noted by Bhattacharya in an interview with Jimmy Dore (see hyperlink above), Fauci and Collins had nothing in terms of actual science. They could not defend lockdowns or anything else based on science alone. So, they turned to propaganda, PR and smear tactics.
Dr. Peter McCullough is another FLCCC member with top-notch medical credentials who is being persecuted by the medical establishment for his outspokenness about early treatment and the dangers of the COVID shots. He’s now written a book, “The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex,” detailing his experiences and the crimes perpetrated against patients, doctors and others in the COVID era.
Dr. Ryan Cole, a clinical pathologist, is yet another example. While he’s been able to be more outspoken than most, thanks to running a private lab, several credentialing organizations have taken action against him in a clear effort to shut him up.
He’s also lost about half of his business, as two insurance companies canceled him for “unprofessional behavior,” i.e., for sharing and discussing the health effects of the COVID jabs, and one of his best friends, with whom he’s worked for 12 years, canceled their business relationship as he didn’t want Cole’s outspokenness to affect his business. “All because of the defamation by the media, so to tell the truth in this day and age is a dangerous thing,” he told me during an interview earlier this year.
Medicine Has Gone Off the Rails
For the past 25 years, and likely far longer, allopathic medicine has been a leading cause of death in the United States. As detailed in “Are Medical Errors Still the Third Leading Cause of Death?” in 1998, researchers concluded that properly prescribed and correctly taken pharmaceutical drugs were the fourth leading cause of death.2425
Two years later, in 2000, an article in JAMA written by the late Dr. Barbara Starfield detailed how physicians were the third leading cause of death in the U.S. One of Starfield’s points of contention with the medical system was the lack of systematic recording and studying of adverse events — a shortcoming that has been taken to absurd levels during the COVID era.
A 2003 article titled “Death by Medicine,”26 written by Dr. Carolyn Dean, Gary Null, Ph.D., Dr. Martin Feldman, Dr. Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, Ph.D., described how the modern conventional American medical system had by then bumbled its way into becoming the No. 1 leading cause of death and injury in the United States, claiming the lives of nearly 784,000 people annually.
These iatrogenic deaths (meaning deaths resulting from the activity of physicians) include everything from adverse drug reactions and avoidable medical errors, to hospital-acquired infections, surgeries gone bad and deaths from unnecessary medical procedures.
During COVID, all of the shortcomings of medicine have been amplified to the point that many now refer to hospitals as “killing fields” — places where greed rules and patients are mistreated, tortured and killed for profit.
So far, the COVID death toll in the U.S. is well over 1 million,27 and it’s not inconceivable that a vast majority of those were killed by the “standard of care” treatment given (i.e., remdesivir and ventilation, and the withholding of food and fluids).
In December that year, we also showed how the AMA encouraged lawlessness by telling private companies to ignore a court’s permanent injunction against vaccine mandates and implement mandates anyway.
Facing a Painful Reality
If there’s a silver lining to any of this, it’s that people are starting to realize just how far off the rails the medical system has gone, and that we need to make radical changes.
Even doctors like Marik are waking up to realize everything they thought they knew about medicine was actually Big Pharma propaganda, and that profits, not care, is the guiding light of most hospitals.
Many, like Marik, are shocked to realize they are being penalized for trying to improve care and save lives at low cost. I recently interviewed critical care physician Dr. Pierre Kory, another member of the FLCCC, who admitted he was woefully naïve when he first started speaking out about ivermectin back in 2020.
He thought the FLCCC would be hailed as heroes. Instead, they were vilified, maligned, persecuted and fired, and continue to be persecuted to this day, as they’re now also treating COVID jab injuries, which aren’t supposed to exist.
Kory has now written a book, “War on Ivermectin: The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the COVID Pandemic,” which will be available after November 15, 2022,28 detailing the playbook used to suppress ivermectin and other effective COVID treatments. My interview with him, in which we discuss these tactics, will air sometime in mid-November.
In closing, if you or someone you know still cannot believe that a doctor would ever withhold information or straight out lie to you, listen to Kirsch’s interview with Marik. Listen to Nass’s story. Read Kory’s book. Look at the legislation being pushed through in California.
Imagine being a doctor with hundreds of thousands of dollars in educational loans, and being told that if you share information that steers a patient away from “standard of care” — whatever that might be — you could lose your medical license. You could lose your career.
It takes a brave heart to stand up to that kind of pressure, which is why there are so few of them out there talking about early treatment and the dangers of remdesivir, ventilation and the COVID jabs. Those who cherish their health will do well to listen to those who are actually putting everything on the line to share the truth.
Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.
The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.
If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.
He may be a best-selling author and one of the most followed physicians in the world, but Dr. Mercola is still a person, like you, who has pet peeves …
The outcome could have been much different – and many lives saved – if Big Pharma hadn’t been so successful at suppressing this generic pharmaceutical that was found to work against COVID-19.
Armed federal agents were used to threaten a traditional Amish farmer just 150 miles outside Washington, D.C. who does not use pesticides, fertilizer or gas to run his farm.
Dr. Pierre Kory details the history of ivermectin and the how and why behind Big Pharma’s suppression of this drug when it was found to work against COVID-19. […]
Lower your blood pressure and strengthen your respiratory muscles in just 30 breaths a day using this simple high-resistance breathing workout. Read here. […]
Studies have shown SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, i.e., antibodies against the spike protein being produced by the COVID jab, do transfer through breastmilk. […]
Ultraprocessed foods are linked to a fast rate of cognitive decline; evidence also links junk food to an altered gut microbiome, obesity and weak bones. […]
September 26, 2022, massive ‘leaks’ were detected in two Russian pipelines, which deliver natural gas from Russia to Europe underneath the Baltic Sea. […]
Antibodies have been uncovered that are so effective at neutralizing COVID-19; they believe the antibodies could serve as an effective substitute for vaccines. […]
Despite EcoHealth’s potential role in the COVID pandemic, Fauci, before leaving office, is now giving EcoHealth another $3.3 million in additional funding. […]
Dr. Pierre Kory dives deep into the factors surrounding the censorship, corruption and coercion of science to work against the interests of the public. […]
Shortly after our website was successfully attacked and taken down, the Mercola headquarters in Florida, was hit by yet another challenge, Hurricane Ian. […]
Unanswered questions of Clinton Campaign involvement
The trial of Igor Danchenko is scheduled for October 11, 2022. While it is only a false statement case, I can’t help but ask whether the trial will reveal any Danchenko contacts with the Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign while he was acting as Christopher Steele’s primary subsource.
The reason for that question? More on that.
First we start with the background. As you may recall, Danchenko was used by Steele as he conducted opposition research on Trump and his associates. Steele’s dossier (also called “Company Reports”) eventually made it into the hands of federal officials and the FBI and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who used it to prepare and submit applications for warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to spy on Carter Page (and to collect the communications of the Trump campaign).
As Special Counsel John Durham alleged in the Danchenko indictment:
“Each of the FISA applications set forth the FBI’s assessment that Page was a knowing agent of Russia and further alleged – based on the Company Reports – that Page was part of a “well-coordinated conspiracy of co-operation” between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.”¹
The charges against Danchenko stem from false statements he gave the FBI during multiple interviews from January 2017 through November 2017. These are the counts from the Danchenko indictment:
Count 1. June 15, 2017: Danchenko denied to FBI agents that he spoke with public relations executive Charles Dolan (a long-time participant in Democrat party politics) about materials in the Steele dossier. In fact, Dolan was the source of Danchenko’s and, as alleged by Special Counsel Durham, was “otherwise involved in the events and information described in the” dossier.
Count 2. March 16, 2017: Danchenko told FBI agents he received a call in late July 2016 from a person he thought was Sergei Millian, when Danchenko knew he had never received a call from Millian.
Count 3. May 18, 2017: Danchenko gave a false statement to FBI agents that he “was under the impression” that the late July 2016 call was from Millian.
Count 4. October 24, 2017: Danchenko falsely stated to FBI agents that he believed he spoke to Millian on the phone on more than one occasion.
Count 5. November 16, 2017: Danchenko lied that he “believed he has spoken to [Millian] on the telephone,” when Danchenko well knew he had never spoken to Millian.
This isn’t the easiest false statements’ case, so credit to Durham for bringing it. The reason isn’t because Danchenko told the truth. He’s most certainly a serial fabricator. It’s that Danchenko’s statements were made around 5 years ago to sloppy agents, and to an FBI and Department of Justice that was uninterested in uncovering and pursuing the truth.
Adding to the problems is that Sergei Millian, concerned about FBI abuses and generally untrustworthy of US assurances, remains somewhere overseas and will not testify at trial. At the same time, Durham must be conscious of the fact that the FBI was more than willing to allow Danchenko to lie.
Materiality
That brings us to “materiality.” Danchenko is charged under 18 USC § 1001, which criminalizes false statements to federal officials. Under this statute, Durham must prove that Danchenko’s statements were “materially false.”²
Normally, proving materiality in this context wouldn’t be difficult. But Durham faces the challenge of proving that Danchenko’s false statements were material to an FBI that invited and ignoredDanchenko’s lies. If there is any relief to those waiting on justice to be administered, it is that Danchenko’s lies didn’t need to influence the FBI. They only needed to be “capable of influencing” the FBI. Danchenko’s false statements definitely meet that standard.
One way Durham will explain the materiality of Danchenko’s false statements will be to point to FBI obligations to notify the FISC about the misrepresentations from its witness under FISC Local Rule 13:
“the FBI and DOJ would be required to inform the FISC about the misrepresentations made in eachof the applications it provided to the FISC. Had the FISC known of these misrepresentations, it could have terminated the surveillance of Carter Page and/or ordered the FBI and DOJ to destroy the information it had already collected.”³
Not that the FBI would have notified the FISC. As has already been known, the FBI was generally aware of Danchenko’s contacts with Charles Dolan (and thus that one source of Danchenko’s information was a Clinton ally) and likely suspected back June 2017 that Danchenko had lied about his conversations with Dolan. Then there is the fact that the FBI refused to notify the FISC, contrary to the court’s rules, that Danchenko had contradicted some of Steele’s reporting.
Moreover, the FBI misrepresented to the FISC in 2018 that it had “no control over” Danchenko, when in fact the FBI made Danchenko a paid confidential human source (CHS) from March 2017 through October 2020. This hid Danchenko from inquiry, and thus protected the FBI (and the DOJ and the Mueller Special Counsel) from their own lies being exposed. “Sources and methods.”
To elaborate on that issue, I’m wondering if we’ll see any evidence as to who approved Danchenko as a paid CHS and why the FBI took that step. It might happen, if only because Danchenko lied while he was a confidential human source. If we had to guess a name, we’d venture it may have been former FBI Assistant Director for Counter Intelligence Bill Priestap who approved Danchenko as a CHS.
And if the past provides any guidance, we may also see the steps the FBI took – or refused to take – to corroborate Danchenko’s statements, and who at the FBI was involved in that effort. At the Sussmann trial, for example, it was revealed that FBI leadership stopped inquiry into Sussmann’s role as the source for the bogus Alfa Bank information. As we wrote a couple weeks ago:
“the dispute over the materiality of Danchenko’s lies almost requires the defense to prove government misconduct/ignorance. To which we all should say – good. Expose them.”
What of Charles Dolan and the Clinton Campaign?
Expect Charles Dolan to testify to his conversations with Danchenko and others relating to the dossier allegations at the trial. He’s already testified before a grand jury. For background, Dolan is described in the Danchenko indictment as having “maintained historical and ongoing involvement in Democratic politics.” His history includes serving as chairman of a national Democratic political organization, being a state chairman of Bill Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 presidential campaigns, and an advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.
Based on his ties with the Clintons, one would think that the Clinton Campaign would have known about Dolan’s contacts with Danchenko. However, the Danchenko indictment states “individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign did not direct, and were not aware of, [Dolan’s] meetings with Danchenko and other Russian nationals.”
That statement concerns Dolan’s lack of interactions with the Clinton Campaign. It still leaves unanswered the question of whether Danchenko had any contacts with the Clinton campaign, and whether the Clinton campaign was aware of Danchenko’s activities.
Two theories on that. It’s possible that the Clinton campaign received updates on the opposition research but otherwise isolated itself from these matters, preferring its lawyers at Perkins Coie and its contractors at Fusion GPS (and their sources) get their hands dirty. That would be consistent with what we saw in the Michael Sussmann trial, a real-time demonstration of how the Clinton machine uses the the attorney-client and work-product privileges to manipulate the press, spread false accusations, and hide a number of sins.
It is also possible that the Clinton campaign had more knowledge about Danchenko than has been made publicly available. I bring that up because back in December, news and discussions abound about a curious filing by Durham, which confirmed that the Clinton campaign and “multiple former employees of that campaign” were subject to “matters before the Special Counsel.” In that filing, Durham discussed the potential conflict of interest of Danchenko’s lawyers, whose firm also represented the Clinton campaign and those former campaign employees.
Specifically, Durham raised these areas of inquiry that may become issues at the Danchenko trial:
The Clinton Campaign’s knowledge or lack of knowledge concerning the veracity of information in the dossiers sourced by Danchenko;
The Clinton Campaign’s awareness or lack of awareness of Danchenko’s collection methods and sub-sources;
Meetings or communications between and among the Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, and Christopher Steele regarding or involving Danchenko;
Danchenko’s knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the Clinton Campaign’s role in the activities surrounding the Steele Dossier; and
The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.
All of those points are important, but that last one is particularly compelling and is worth repeating: “The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.”
That implies the Clinton Campaign’s awareness of Danchenko and contacts with Danchenko. (After all, if the answer was “no,” then there would be no conflict.) Thus the potential conflict described by Durham:
“the Clinton Campaign and [Danchenko] each might have an incentive to shift blame and/or responsibility to the other party for any allegedly false information that was contained within the Company Reports and/or provided to the FBI.”
All this reminds us of a question that has been previously asked. If the Clinton Campaign was being informed of the work by Fusion GPS, what of the likelihood that the Clinton Campaign was informing the work of Fusion GPS?
And here’s a follow-up question: from whom did Danchenko get the name Sergei Millian?
Furthermore, one has to ask whether those Clinton Campaign/Danchenko contacts, if they existed, stopped after the election – or whether they continued through Danchenko’s 2017 interviews with the FBI.
Will these issues be raised, and will we get answers on the Clinton Campaign’s ties to Danchenko (or Danchenko’s “sources”)? As outside observers, we can’t – and won’t – make guarantees. There’s danger in false promises just like there’s danger in false hope. Durham, however, has suggested the possibility of former representatives of the Clinton Campaign testifying at trial, stating:
“in the event that one or more former representatives of the Clinton Campaign are called to testify” at trial, Danchenko and the witness “would be represented by the same law firm, resulting in a potential conflict.”
Whether they testify remains to be seen. We haven’t yet seen a witness list.
Other Matters
If you’re interested about Danchenko’s potential defenses, they’re outlined in his motion to dismiss, which was ultimately denied by the Court. I’ll summarize briefly: during trial, expect his attorney to argue that Danchenko’s answers were literally true and that the statements were immaterial.
Also, this week the Court issued an order concerning evidence Durham sought to admit at trial. You can read the order here. It’s heavy on details, many of which are ancillary to the charges against Danchenko. Here’s a summary of some of the more important parts of that order.
Danchenko was subject to a prior counterintelligence investigation, after Danchenko told colleagues “he had access to people who would be willing to pay money in exchange for classified information.” The FBI made this a “full investigation” after learning Danchenko was an associate of “two FBI counterintelligence subjects” and had previous contacts with “the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers.” This investigation was closed after the FBI mistakenly believed Danchenko had left the country. The Court will allow the admission of the fact that Danchenko was part of a prior counter-intelligence investigation, though it will exclude details of this investigation.⁴
Durham seeks to admit evidence of Danchenko’s uncharged false statements to the FBI regarding his sourcing of the Ritz-Carlton (pee tape) allegations. The Court has generally denied that request, with leave to possibly allow for evidence that Danchenko knew Millian was not a Steele source for that information “based on the evidence submitted at trial.”
Evidence of Danchenko’s false statements about disclosure of his work for Steele and Orbis is admissible as it relates to Dolan.
The Court will allow the July 26, 2016 e-mail as noted below from Sergei Millian to be introduced at trial, even though Millian will not be present. It will be used by Durham to show that Millian’s state of mind – one of confusion – after Danchenko reached out to him. It advances the theory that Millian never talked to Danchenko. (Other e-mails from Millian are inadmissible.)
Trial Transcripts and Updates Throughout the Trial
Finally, there will be daily transcripts for each day of the Danchenko trial with the most relevant and important excerpts (just as was done during the Sussmann trial). Should you be interested in the developments of this trial, keep your eyes open for any news outlets that may be gathering the transcripts and applying them for on line reading.
Techno Fog is one media that will be providing them while anyone wishing to contribute donations will be greatly appreciated, as it costs lots of money to obtain the transcripts.
“In summary, we have highlighted the pitfalls of having considered until now COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as just conventional vaccines, and we have indicated the preclinical, clinical and post-marketing safety assessments that are most urgently needed. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are actually pharmaceutical drugs, and consequently their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and possibly also their pharmacogenetics, must be properly characterized to provide a solid background of knowledge for their rational and targeted use, thus stopping ‘playing dice’ with these products due to the misbelief that the same vaccine at the same dose is good for everyone, and that adverse effects occur just by chance.”
Those were the words of Italian researchers in a recent pharmacological analysis of the COVID shots published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences nearly two years after these products were foisted upon 5.35 billion human beings – often multiple times – under the false pretense of the jabs acting like vaccines. Who will be held accountable?
Every day, news pours out about the lack of safety and ineffectiveness of the shots, but they fail to move the needle on policy. It is unclear what it will take to get these biological agents pulled from the market, but here are some of the most recent bombshells proving the shots are extremely unsafe and ineffective:
Autopsy shows extensive brain and heart damage: Nearly two years into this mass genocide, global governments have refused to conduct widespread autopsies on those who died suddenly shortly after getting the shots. They have also rebuffed calls to release the data and analysis on those autopsies they did conduct. One can only imagine what we would learn about the extent of the danger, but now we have a glimpse from an autopsy of a 76-year-old man with Parkinson’s disease who died three weeks after receiving a third dose. The case study published by German pathologists in the prestigious journal “Vaccines” found severe inflammation in the brain tissue and heart attributable to the shots.
The pathologists used immunohistochemistry, which utilizes staining techniques to light up only specific antigens, in this case only the spike protein native to the shots, not the nucleocapsid protein from the virus. What did they find?
“However, histopathological analyses of the brain uncovered previously unsuspected findings, including acute vasculitis (predominantly lymphocytic) as well as multifocal necrotizing encephalitis of unknown etiology with pronounced inflammation including glial and lymphocytic reaction. In the heart, signs of chronic cardiomyopathy as well as mild acute lympho-histiocytic myocarditis and vasculitis were present” (emphasis added).
Importantly, they only found spike antibodies without any nucleocapsid antibodies, meaning that this individual was only exposed to the shots, not to the actual virus. Until now, many pharma apologists blamed the rash of sudden encephalitis and myocarditis cases on the virus, but as the authors note, “The findings corroborate previous reports of encephalitis and myocarditis caused by gene-based COVID-19 vaccines.”
Although he died following his third shot in December 2021, interestingly, the man already “experienced pronounced cardiovascular side effects, for which he repeatedly had to consult his doctor,” after his first shot (AstraZeneca) in May 2021 and “increased anxiety, lethargy, and social withdrawal” after his second shot (Pfizer) in July 2021. He seemed to decline rapidly even before the third shot, suffering “severe motor impairment and a recurrent need for wheelchair support.” The man in the study “never fully recovered” from the shots by the time he got his booster in December.
Two weeks after the third vaccination, he “suddenly collapsed while eating dinner” without “coughing or any signs of food aspiration.” If not for his family paying for an autopsy, we would not have this information about a cause of death that likely occurred in countless thousands of other young and old vaccinated people.
With findings like this, how can every case of a sudden death post-vaccination not be immediately investigated with pathology to determine if this phenomenon is occurring in a significant portion of the population? Where is the emergency to get ahead of this and detect, diagnose, and treat people before it’s too late? After all, only 5.3 billion people are potentially affected.
Negative efficacy galore: Imagine engaging in societal apartheid and persecuting those who didn’t get the jabs on the assumption that they are spreaders of disease but then discovering that, in fact, the opposite is true? I’ve been reporting on negative efficacy for over a year already, but now we have a Kaiser Permanganate study that shows negative efficacy of the shots against all variants within 150 days. And this study shows the more you inject, the more you infect; specifically, over time, those with three doses fare worse than those with two.
The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons posted a Twitter thread with numerous studies published throughout the past year showing a similar trend of negative efficacy resulting from the shots.
\u201cThis is the latest in a string of studies that report COVID vaccine effectiveness (VE) wanes into negative territory. Here are some of the others. \ud83e\uddf5 1/\u201d
One of the likely culprits for negative efficacy is that the shots prime the body to respond to a version of the virus that has long since changed, thereby making the natural immune response misfire. Supporters of endless jabs will suggest that this is why they created the new bivalent shot for BA.5 (the one that was studied in eight mice and no humans). However, an entirely new variant is already surging, rendering this shot just as irrelevant and likely counterproductive. According to the CDC, BA.4.6 now represents 13% of all COVID-19 cases and is rising sharply, with some other variants breaking out as well.
Negative efficacy even against death: Well, at least the shots still work against critical illness, right? Wrong! Deaths have largely plummeted across all groups given that Omicron is not nearly as pathogenic as the previous versions of the virus, but data continues to show the overwhelming number of deaths to be among the vaccinated. It turns out that in the month of June, 92% of all COVID deaths in Canada were among the vaccinated, even though they composed a slightly smaller share of the population (85%). Even more telling is the fact that 81% of the deaths were among those who had three or more doses, even though those individuals only account for 34% of the population.
Neonatal deaths: Remember when Scotland suffered a sudden rash of neonatal deaths last September? At the time, 21 newborns had died in a month, triggering an investigation because the numbers rose above an upper control limit for the first time in four years. Neonatal deaths hit 4.9 per 1,000 live births, on a par with levels that were last seen in the late 1980s. This was an astounding phenomenon, yet the investigation yielded no cause other than disproving COVID as a culprit. But notice that the COVID shots were never investigated. Well, now the data is triggering another investigation, as at least 18 newborns died within four weeks of birth during the month of March 2022, the equivalent of 4.6 per 1,000 births. Here is the trend line from Public Health Scotland:
Notice the spikes above baseline beginning right around the beginning of 2021 and accelerating in two peaks later on. What major biological product was mass-distributed around that time? Obviously this alone doesn’t prove any causation, but the fact that we know the spike protein goes into the reproductive system and breast milk, menstrual irregularities are ubiquitous, so many countries are experiencing record low birth rates around the same time, and these shots are otherwise extremely inflammatory in the adult population, wouldn’t you think there would be some interest in investigating the shots as a potential suspect?
Just how bad are the menstrual and gynecological problems? One recent survey of 6,049 women from May 16, 2021, through December 31, 2021, right after most young women got the shot, found 292, or 4.8%, of the respondents self-reported a case of decidual cast shedding (DCS). DCS is a rare gynecological disorder in which a woman sheds her entire uterine lining intact through the vaginal canal as if she were having menstrual bleeding. It is so rare that the authors of this paper could only find 40 documented cases in 109 years.
It’s not like the government doesn’t have blaring and glaring safety signals on reproductive health, either. As of late September, there were 5,055 miscarriages reported to VAERS and 11,598 instances of vaginal/uterine hemorrhaging. Remember, miscarriages are extremely hard to pin on the vaccine, so the fact that so many felt they could report it demonstrates there is likely a woeful underreporting rate. While none of this directly proves the shots are primarily responsible for the neonatal deaths, it would be ludicrous not to carefully investigate them as a culprit.
Other countries experienced this problem as well. In Iceland, deaths among infants doubled in 2021 from the baseline level of the preceding nine years. Several Israeli hospitals saw similar trends in stillbirths and miscarriages.
Adverse events in nursing babies: We already know that the therapeutic can pass through the mother’s milk from lactating women who get the shots. Now, a new study published in JAMA, which was bizarrely designed to make the shots look safe, actually reveals that 3.5% of the women reported a decrease in breast milk supply and 1.2% reported “issues with their breastmilk-fed infant after vaccination.” They decline to describe the nature of those issues, but the fact that they can so casually report this as if these numbers are good news is shocking.
Keep in mind that the swine flu vaccine was pulled from the market in 1976 after 1 in 100,000 experienced Guillain-Barre syndrome. The fact that these shots could be forced down people’s throats, including pregnant and nursing women, after such relatively high percentages of adverse events defies logic.
Yet it’s now clear the medical community and the government knew this shot was problematic from day one. Already in early February 2021, a local Fox affiliate in Salt Lake City reported that the Society of Breast Imaging rolled out a new protocol for women to wait for mammograms after getting the shots after they discovered 11% of those who got Moderna’s first dose and 16% after the second dose experienced inflamed lymph nodes. They knew such a high percentage of hyperinflammation is abnormal and portends trouble, particularly for breast cancer and lymphoma, yet they simply pushed off mammograms rather than raising the alarm about the cause of the inflammation. No wonder the Pfizer CEO declined to appear before an EU parliamentary hearing on the shots. There’s an endless litany of crimes against humanity he must answer for. But what is our excuse for not holding all the people in government and medicine accountable in the U.S.? One could have feigned ignorance in early 2021, but now we are light-years past the threshold for willful misconduct. How much longer will we allow the government to “roll the dice” with the lives of all humanity and even their future offspring?
Nobody ever accused economist Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University of being a radical libertarian or indeed a radical anything. He is a comfortable member of the Establishment.
But even he can’t stomach the “Russia blew up its own pipelines” absurdity that nobody in the world except U.S. television viewers believes.
In a recent television broadcast, Sachs stunned his regime mouthpiece hosts when he said:
I was attacked in the Atlantic for being on the side of peace. And I confess I’m on the side of peace. I am very worried that we are on a path of escalation to nuclear war, nothing less than that. We have essentially a war in which Russia feels that this war is at the core of its security interests. The United States insists that it will do anything to support Ukraine’s defeat of Russia. Russia views this as a proxy war with the United States. And whatever one thinks about this, this is a path of extraordinarily dangerous escalation. And I am very fearful….
A lot of the world is watching the events in horror and a lot of the world doesn’t like this NATO expansion, which they interpret as at the core of this. They want to see compromise between the US and Russia in vote after vote in the United Nations. Basically, it’s been the Western countries that have been voting for sanctions and denunciations and other actions, whereas most of the world, certainly most of the world counted by population, is on the sidelines.
They just view this as a horrible clash between Russia and the United States. They don’t view this, as we describe it in the media, as an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine. Anyone in the United States, they’d say, well, what else is it? But that’s because the way that our media have been reporting; this conflict [actually] goes back a long time.
It didn’t start on February 24th, 2022. In fact, the war itself started in 2014, not in 2022. And even that had antecedents. And so most of the world doesn’t see it the way we describe it. But most of the world is just terrified right now, frankly, because it’s unbelievable to be hearing only one side, Well, we’ll use nuclear weapons if we need to, and the other side saying, no, you can’t frighten us….
Europe is in a very, very sharp economic downturn. The sharp decline of output and living standards also shows up as a rise of prices. But the main fact is that the European economy is getting hammered by the sudden cutoff of energy. And now to make it definitive, the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, which I would bet was a US action, perhaps US and Poland.
One of the anchors demands his evidence for this claim. Sachs replies:
Well, first of all, there’s direct radar evidence that US helicopters, military helicopters that are normally based in Gdansk, were circling over this area. We also had the threats from the United States earlier this year that one way or another we are going to end Nord Stream. We also have a remarkable statement by Secretary Blinken last Friday in a press conference [in which he said] this is also a tremendous opportunity. That’s a strange way to talk if you’re worried about piracy on international infrastructure of vital significance.
I know this runs counter to our narrative. You’re not allowed to say things like that in the West. But the fact of the matter is, all over the world, people are thinking the US did it. And by the way, even reporters in many of the involved papers are privately thinking that as well.
What Sachs is saying is eminently sensible, but we have an American public raised on conformity and compliance (thank you, government schools), so anyone dissenting from the Establishment-supplied narrative is automatically demonized.
I assure you, Hillary Clinton and Mitch McConnell and the CIA are not your friends. I promise that to you.
This is seriously the most bizarre case of Stockholm Syndrome of all time.
If we could educate people in a way that doesn’t portray the ruling class as wonderful geniuses looking out for our welfare, maybe we wouldn’t be so cavalier about nuclear war, and maybe we wouldn’t be so inclined to accept whatever line CNN shoves down our gullets, dismissing everyone else as traitors.
Hurricane Ian may have spared many neighborhoods, but the climate-change propaganda surrounding it has the potential to do enormous damage.
Michael Shellenberger, author of Apocalypse Never, just released an excellent thread on it:
Over the last week, the mainstream news media claimed that hurricanes are becoming more frequent and intense, but they’re not, as the data clearly show. What’s more, it’s clear that the media are engaging in deliberate misinformation. These aren’t innocent mistakes.
[A recent] article in the Financial Times [claims] that “hurricane frequency is on the rise,” based on NOAA data. But NOAA says, “After adjusting for a likely under-count of hurricanes in the pre-satellite era there is essentially no long-term trend in hurricane counts.”
In fact, NOAA writes, “The evidence for an upward trend is even weaker if we look at U.S. landfalling hurricanes, which even show a slight negative trend beginning from 1900 or from the late 1800s.”
In other words, the graphic the Financial Times chose to show of apparently rising hurricane frequency is, in reality, a graphic showing improved hurricane detection thanks to satellites. What are the chances that Financial Times reporter Aime Williams didn’t know this? I would guess close to zero.
It’s possible that Williams was careless but I doubt it. I would bet good money that she read NOAA’s web site, which clearly warns that “there is essentially no long-term trend in hurricane counts,” and chose to ignore it in order to sensationalize.
What about intensity? Same story. Writes NOAA, “After adjusting for changes in observing capabilities (limited ship observations) in the pre-satellite era, there is no significant long-term trend (since the 1880s) in the proportion of hurricanes that become major hurricanes.”
Bottom line? “We conclude that the data do not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced century-scale increase in frequency of tropical storms, hurricanes, or major hurricanes, or in the proportion of hurricanes that become major hurricanes.”
Against the best available science, the news media unleashed a hurricane of misinformation using the exact same manipulation of data as Aime Williams.
The quantity of pseudoscience and journalistic irresponsibility is breathtaking.
For example:
Again Shellenberger:
And now it’s clear that activist scientists at the UN are working with Google to control the information available on climate change. This is dark, chilling stuff.
(Here Shellenberger is referring to a recent news item in which the UN Secretary for Global Communications says they “own the science” on “climate change,” and that thanks to their partnership with Google, dissident voices are being pushed down in search results.)
To the extent the cost of hurricanes is rising it’s due entirely to greater wealth in harm’s way. Consider how much more developed Miami Beach is today compared to a century ago. Once you adjust for rising wealth, there is no trend of rising costs.
Is it possible that hurricane intensity will rise in the future? Yes. NOAA predicts a 5% increase in hurricane intensity. But it also predicts a 25% decline in hurricane frequency. I have not seen a single mainstream news media outlet mention any of this.
This is not complicated. The information is not hidden away somewhere. NOAA even boldfaces its key conclusion. Journalists know this. They’ve been covering this for decades. It’s clear that they are actively trying to mislead the public.
We all remember a time when “climate change” talk was an annoyance but had few real-world consequences. Now it’s everywhere, and the real-world consequences are frankly deadly, especially for the developing world.
The stuff about the truth being suppressed in search results is especially disturbing and people must wake up to this disturbing reality of the press embellishing and lying at every opportunity to serve their god the underlying almighty dollar.
fox files 
Written
on 4.October.2022.