patrick.net

https://www.thefp.com/p/us-public-health-agencies-arent-following

“It's like a horror movie I'm being forced to watch and I can't close my eyes,” one senior FDA official lamented. “People are getting bad advice and we can’t say anything.”

By Marty Makary M.D., M.P.H. and Tracy Beth Høeg, MD, PhD

July 14, 2022

That particular FDA doctor was referring to two recent developments inside the agency. First, how, with no solid clinical data, the agency authorized Covid vaccines for infants and toddlers, including those who already had Covid. And second, the fact that just months before, the FDA bypassed their external experts to authorize booster shots for young children.

That doctor is hardly alone.

At the NIH, doctors and scientists complain to us about low morale and lower staffing: The NIH’s Vaccine Research Center has had many of its senior scientists leave over the last year, including the director, deputy director and chief medical officer. “They have no leadership right now. Suddenly there’s an enormous number of jobs opening up at the highest level positions,” one NIH scientist told us. (The people who spoke to us would only agree to be quoted anonymously, citing fear of professional repercussions.)

The CDC has experienced a similar exodus. “There’s been a large amount of turnover. Morale is low,” one high level official at the CDC told us. “Things have become so political, so what are we there for?” Another CDC scientist told us: “I used to be proud to tell people I work at the CDC. Now I’m embarrassed.”

Why are they embarrassed? In short, bad science.

The longer answer: that the heads of their agencies are using weak or flawed data to make critically important public health decisions. That such decisions are being driven by what’s politically palatable to people in Washington or to the Biden administration. And that they have a myopic focus on one virus instead of overall health.

Nowhere has this problem been clearer—or the stakes higher—than on official public health policy regarding children and Covid.

First, they demanded that young children be masked in schools. On this score, the agencies were wrong. Compelling studies later found schools that masked children had no different rates of transmission. And for social and linguistic development, children need to see the faces of others.

Next came school closures. The agencies were wrong—and catastrophically so. Poor and minority children suffered learning loss with an 11-point drop in math scores alone and a 20% drop in math pass rates. There are dozens of statistics of this kind.

Then they ignored natural immunity. Wrong again. The vast majority of children have already had Covid, but this has made no difference in the blanket mandates for childhood vaccines. And now, by mandating vaccines and boosters for young healthy people, with no strong supporting data, these agencies are only further eroding public trust.

One CDC scientist told us about her shame and frustration about what happened to American children during the pandemic: “CDC failed to balance the risks of Covid with other risks that come from closing schools,” she said. “Learning loss, mental health exacerbations were obvious early on and those worsened as the guidance insisted on keeping schools virtual. CDC guidance worsened racial equity for generations to come. It failed this generation of children.”

An official at the FDA put it this way: “I can’t tell you how many people at the FDA have told me, ‘I don't like any of this, but I just need to make it to my retirement.’” ...

“It seems criminal that we put out the recommendation to give mRNA Covid vaccines to babies without good data. We really don’t know what the risks are yet. So why push it so hard?” a CDC physician added. A high-level FDA official felt the same way: “The public has no idea how bad this data really is. It would not pass muster for any other authorization.”

The parallel insight is the FDA 'testing' is probably for shit, either, because they are a captured lapdog of Pharma, or Pharma bribes the peer review apparatus for the results they want. We don't know what we are taking any more.

They put standard warning screeds in small print in their bottles (print is cheap), and pass along medicaments that are 1. intentionally harmful, requiring more medication 2. coincidentally harmful 3. ineffective or partially effective but compromised etc. etc. so that doctors don't know what the fuck they are prescribing or care and consumers don't know what the fuck they are taking, but are beguiled by Hollywood models cavorting in sunlit fields or engaging wonderful hobbies or activities, euphorically living twenty million dollar lifestyles, free of their medical afflictions.

Doctors used to be the gateways, there was no direct to TV Pharma advertising, but then somehow they legislated so Pharma could flog their shit through direct advertising and make the patients hector their doctors for the nostrums.

Ceffer says

they legislated so Pharma could flog their shit through direct advertising and make the patients hector their doctors for the nostrums.

Worse, Pharma has become a large enough share of advertising the networks dare not have any news stories that do not push what Pharma is selling.

Patrick says

Good. I've been trying to get people to recognize the media lies for 30 years. The more blatantly they lie, they better. Makes my mission a lot easier.

Don't complain when your enemy, the enemy of the people, makes a mistake. Encourage more "mistakes".

https://slaynews.com/news/biden-pumps-taxpayer-money-anti-conservative-group/

Democrat President Joe Biden’s administration has pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money into an organization that targets conservatives.

Biden gave the huge “anti-extremism” grant to the British think tank Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD).

However, the London-based organization is under congressional scrutiny for pressuring social media companies to censor conservatives.

The ISD has called on social media companies to censor conservative commentators such as Ben Shapiro for “misgendering” transgenders.

However, despite the concerns, the foreign organization will now use American tax dollars to help the State Department and Defense Department track “extremism” and “disinformation.”

The State Department gave a $249,993 grant to the Institute for Strategic Dialogue in April, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon awarded $80,000 to it last month, according to a federal spending database.

The grants, which have not been previously reported, were given to the institute to convene an anti-extremism workshop for the U.S. embassy in Germany, and to study extremism in the military as part of an Air Force research project.

Lol, by "extremism" in the military they no doubt mean servicemen who take their commitment to the Constitution seriously.

https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/1241.html

https://rumble.com/v18s66i-bombshell-dr.-clare-craig-exposes-how-pfizer-twisted-their-clinical-trial-d.html
June 17, 2022

TRANSCRIPT

DR. CLARE CRAIG: I'm Dr. Clare Craig, I'm a Diagnostic Pathologist and I'm co-chair of the HART Group and I want to take you through the evidence that Pfizer just presented to the FDA on the 6 months to 4 year old children.

There's an awful lot about this trial that has shocked me and I think will shock you, too.

The trial recruited 4,526 children aged from 6 months to four years old. 3,000 of these children did not make it to the end of the trial. That is a huge number, two thirds of them. Why was there this drop off? That needs to be answered. And without an answer to that, on that basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void.

So what did the trial show? Well, they defined severe covid as children who had a slightly raised heart rate or a few more breaths per minute. There were six children aged 2 to 4 who had severe covid in the vaccine group but only one in the placebo group. So on that basis, the likelihood that this vaccine is actually causing severe covid is higher than the likelihood that it isn't. There was actually one child who was hospitalized in this trial. They had a fever and a seizure. They had been vaccinated.

So now let's turn to what they defined as any covid. And what they did was to utterly twist the data.

They vaccinated the children and they waited 3 weeks after the first dose before the second dose. In that 3 week period, 34 of the vaccinated children got covid and only 13 in the placebo group, which worked out as a 30% increased chance of catching covid in that 3 week period if you were vaccinated. So they ignored that data.

And then there was an 8 week gap between the second and the third dose, where again, children were getting plenty of covid in the vaccine arm. So they ignored that data.

There was then several weeks after the third dose, which they also ignored, which meant that in the end they had ignored 97% of the covid that occurred during the trial, and they just looked at tiny numbers. So tiny.

In the end they were comparing 3 children in the vaccine arm who had covid with 7 in the placebo arm and they said that this showed the vaccine was effective.

So they measured how many of these children actually managed to catch covid twice in the two month followup period. And there were 12 children who had covid twice and all but one of them were vaccinated, mostly with 3 doses. So you have to wonder what on earth they're thinking when the claim of reduction in covid was only 4 children and here we have 12 children who got covid twice, 11 of them vaccinated.

So let's just recap. They recruited 4,500 children, 3,000 of them dropped out, and in the end they're claiming this vaccine works on the basis of 3 covid cases versus 7, a difference of 4 children only, and all of this on a backdrop of a disease which doesn't affect children, and with no long-term safety data.

We have to ask how an ethics committee could have approved this trial in babies. Babies are not at risk from covid. And now we have Pfizer who are presenting this as evidence to the FDA in order to apply for an Emergency Use Authorization. Emergency Use Authorization is meant for a situation where there's a risk of serious injury or death. Now, children under 5 are not at risk of serious injury or death from covid. In fact, in their own trial, they had to make up other ways of measuring the problem because there was no serious injury or death.

Now originally these products were sold as actually also reducing transmission. Now it would be completely unethical to use young children as a human shield, but we now know that they don't reduce transmission. The WHO have stopped claiming that they reduce transmission, so that argument doesn't apply either.

Now if we just turn to safety, what they did is they followed up the patients for 6 weeks before unblinding them and vaccinating them. So the children who'd had placebo, the control group, were followed up for an average of 6 weeks and then given the vaccine. So that's your safety control gone forever.

The fact that this trial existed at all is unbelievable. There are other issues in there which I haven't highlighted, but those are the key ones. Parents should be demanding that the decision makers explain themselves.

[END]

Patrick says

Is this true?

It's true: https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2022/astrazenecas-pascal-soriot-awarded-british-knighthood-services-uk-life-sciences-leadership-global-response-covid-pandemic.html

Pascal Soriot received it. What a joke.

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/were-13-of-pfizer-shots-in-the-eu

From the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccine fiasco, I always sensed that all of the elements were in place for program to be a massive fraud. The program—hastily rolled out under the pressure of a purported emergency, with no proper testing, and with governments such as the European Union pre-purchasing the product for entire populations—promised overnight, windfall profits for the companies involved. Surely, I thought, this created an enormous temptation for Pfizer (which has a long civil and criminal rap sheet) and its venal friends in place like Washington and Brussels to perpetrate a gigantic fraud.

Dr. McCullough and I often talked about the COVID-19 vaccine program as an experiment on the entire population, and that those of us who refused the shot were apparently the control group. The relentless pressure and coercion applied to us in 2021 raised the suspicion that the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex was desperate to eliminate the control group so that the true results of its massive experiment would never be ascertained.

A few months ago, Dr. McCullough was astonished by the results of a Danish study that revealed massive variations of side effects associated with different batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine administered in Denmark. He wrote about the Danish study on our Substack and discussed it with Senator Ron Johnson, who has long been concerned about manufacturing variations and defects in COVID-19 vaccine batches.

The Danish study revealed that just 4.2% of the vaccine batches were associated with the majority of severe adverse events. Conversely <1% of these events were associated with 32.1% of the batches. Over dinner one night this spring, he expressed his astonishment that a full third of the vaccines seemed to be associated with almost ZERO side effects, while just 4.2% of the batches were associated with an extremely high number of adverse events. What could account for this stunning variation?

Dr. McCullough was not the only scientist who wondered about this. In Germany, Dr. Gerald Dyker, Professor of Organic Chemistry at the Ruhr-Uni Bochum and Dr. Jörg Matysik, Professor of Analytical Chemistry at the University of Leipzig, were also stunned by the results of the Danish study.

Since the experimental Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine was authorized in the EU in December of 2020, both professors have been concerned about what they perceived to be a lack of proper testing and manufacturing quality control. And so, following the publication of the Danish study, they set about investigating the cause of this huge variation. A natural starting place was the Paul Ehrlich Institute—the German federal agency, medical regulatory body and research institution for vaccines and biomedicines.

Because the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is manufactured by the German company BioNTech—and because Germany is a founding member of the European Union—the Paul Ehrlich Institute is responsible for all quality-control testing of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine distributed throughout the European Union.

As a true crime investigator, I find this arrangement to be inherently and extremely vulnerable to the temptation to commit fraud. That is to say, if the lords at Pfizer-BioNTech wanted to corrupt the process of quality-control testing of their experimental product, all they would have to do is corrupt the guys at the top of one institution.

As Professors Dyker and Matysik presented in a conversation with a German podcaster on June 22, 2023, the Paul Ehrlich Institute was indeed responsible for the quality-control testing of the three vaccine lots that were the subject of the Danish study.

What is astonishing (and almost certainly evidence of fraud) is that the Institute somehow knew in advance that it wasn’t necessary to perform quality-control tests on the 32.1% of the batches that were associated with almost zero side effects.

(paywall)

https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/24/fbi-told-delaware-u-s-attorney-it-had-already-partially-corroborated-biden-bribery-claims-source-says/

https://www.leefang.com/p/anheuser-busch-lobbyists-sell-access?publication_id=1239256&post_id=135444109&isFreemail=true

Anheuser-Busch Lobbyists Sell Access to Democratic Congressional Staff
The Bud Light maker owns a secret bar in Washington, D.C. for political insiders.

Carefully hidden inside an otherwise nondescript office tower in the middle of Washington, D.C., with a sweeping view of Pennsylvania Avenue, there’s a secret bar just for political insiders.

Last Thursday, I was promptly kicked out of it.

The lobbying division of Anheuser-Busch, the beer-making conglomerate that produces Bud Light, Michelob, and other brands, owns the bar. The invitation-only pub is off-limits to the public, and the event I briefly attended was an ethically-dubious influence-peddling operation.

(paywall)

https://slaynews.com/news/hunter-biden-sold-art-to-a-dem-donor-who-joe-biden-appointed-to-a-prestigious-commission/

Hunter’s “artworks,” which were panned by art critics, sold for upward of $500,000 per piece.

However, new evidence has now confirmed that Hunter Biden did learn the identity of two buyers of his “art.”

You will not be surprised to learn that one of them got a favor from the Biden White House.

The buyer is Democrat donor Elizabeth Hirsh Naftali, a Los Angeles real estate investor and philanthropist.

In July 2022, eight months after Hunter Biden’s first art opening, Joe Biden announced Hirsh Naftali’s appointment to the Commission for the Preservation of America’s Heritage Abroad.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/07/prosecutor-told-hunter-biden-loved-us-attorneys-investigation/

The ongoing investigation into Hunter Biden’s tax affairs and overseas business dealings has come under increased scrutiny recently, revealing disturbing connections that raise serious questions about conflicts of interest.

According to a report from Fox News, a thorough examination of Chief Deputy Attorney General of Delaware Alexander Snyder-Mackler, his association with the Biden family, and the investigation into Hunter Biden brings to light a concerning web of relationships that demands closer scrutiny.

Mackler’s long-standing ties with the Bidens cannot be overlooked, having served as Joe Biden’s legal counsel during his vice presidency and as a press secretary during the former senator’s tenure between 2007 and 2008.

Perhaps even more significant is the fact, Mackler’s stint as an assistant United States attorney in the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s office coincided with the federal inquiry into Hunter Biden’s financial affairs.

While the specifics of Mackler’s involvement in the probe remain elusive, his prominent position in the office investigating the president’s son raises legitimate concerns about impartiality.

Intriguingly, emails retrieved from Hunter Biden’s laptop, verified by Fox News, depict a close relationship between Mackler and Hunter Biden, with Mackler signing off one email with “Love you brother.”

https://thegloriousamerican.com/studiesscience/feds-warn-more-eerie-ufo-news-could-drop-if-further-biden-crimes-exposed-7-26-23/

One need not be a Dem donor or even a Dem at all to buy a Hunter original. Just someone who needs to remit a payment for a favor.

https://slaynews.com/news/house-oversight-committee-launches-probe-hunter-bidens-art-sales-buyer-exposed-democrat-donor/

House Oversight Committee Launches Probe into Hunter Biden’s ‘Art’ Sales as Buyer Exposed as Democrat Donor

Patrick says

House Oversight Committee Launches Probe into Hunter Biden’s ‘Art’ Sales as Buyer Exposed as Democrat Donor

Why would that matter? The Dem donor already paid a bribe. What needs to be tied together is what painting buyer suddenly got special treatment. A Dem fan boy buying a Hunter payment will just come across like a Trump fan buying a signed red hat.

https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1686369872991678466

REMEMBER THIS?

When Joe Biden OPENLY Bragged About Getting A Ukrainian Prosecutor Fired

BIDEN: "I said, 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're NOT getting the money.' Well, son of a b*tch. He got fired."

Hunter had a no-work job on the board of Burisma paying $50,000/month.

The job was entirely to be connected to Pedo Joe so that Joe could do things like withhold US aid to Ukraine unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma got fired.

Trump attempted to expose Pedo Joe's corruption and got impeached for it.

Nothing at all happened to Pedo Joe even when he publicly bragged about abusing his office to influence US foreign policy so that his son could rake in $50K/month for doing nothing at all.

You know, when I think about it, the push for the poke and croak, the resources available on PatNet (@Rin, among others), ivermectin, the @Rin cocktail. I'm half of the opinion that Patnet saved my family's life, or at least spared us multiple seasons of "illness and death." Thanks @Patrick, @Rin, and @richwicks, for keeping my family largely out of harm's way.

stereotomy says

richwicks

What did I do?

The only thing I did was say this injection is bullshit as was the "pandemic", and I concluded that in part by @OnVacation - he went through CDC stats and it was pretty clear we were never in a pandemic.

This has been a wake up call to me too. I didn't think they could lie about outright data, but they can. I remember 20 years ago, if a company pulled some shit, a bunch of engineers would expose because they'd go through the math or stats - nobody does this anymore and when they do, the information doesn't get far.