VIDEO: Why the Boosted Are Now at Highest Risk of COVID

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • According to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, more than 1 million excess deaths — that is, deaths in excess of the historical average — have been recorded since the COVID-19 pandemic began two years ago, and this cannot be explained by COVID-19. Deaths from heart disease, high blood pressure, dementia and many other illnesses rose during that time
  • Across the world, death rates have also risen in tandem with COVID shot administration, with the most-jabbed areas surpassing the least-jabbed in terms of excess mortality and COVID-related deaths
  • According to Walgreens data, during the week of April 19 through 25, 2022, 13% of unvaccinated persons tested positive for COVID. Of those who received two doses five months or more ago, 23.1% tested positive, and of those who received a third dose five months or more ago, the positive rate was 26.3%. So, after the first booster shot (the third dose), people are at greatest risk of testing positive for COVID
  • U.K. government data show the all-cause mortality rate is between 100% and 300% greater among people who got their first COVID shot 21 days or more ago. The risk for all-cause death is also significantly elevated among those who got their second dose at least six months ago, and mildly elevated among those who got their third dose less than 21 days ago. As of January 2022, all who got one or more doses at least 21 days ago were dying at significantly elevated rates
  • Other data also show that COVID mortality rates are far higher in areas with high vaccination rates, and risk-benefit analyses reveal the jabs do more harm than good in most age groups

According to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data,1 more than 1 million excess deaths — that is, deaths in excess of the historical average — have been recorded since the COVID-19 pandemic began two years ago, and this cannot be explained by COVID-19.

Deaths from heart disease, high blood pressure, dementia and many other illnesses rose during that time.2 “We’ve never seen anything like it,” Robert Anderson, CDC’s head of mortality statistics, told The Washington Post in mid-February 2022.3

According to University of Warwick researchers, “the scale of excess non-COVID deaths is large enough for it to be seen as its own pandemic.”4 A number of explanations have been offered, including the fact that lockdowns and other COVID restrictions discouraged or prevented people from seeking care. But another, less discussed factor may also be at play.

Across the world, death rates have risen in tandem with COVID shot administration, with the most-jabbed areas surpassing the least-jabbed in terms of excess mortality and COVID-related deaths. This flies in the face of official claims that the shots prevent severe COVID infection and lower your risk of death, be it from COVID or all causes.5

Boosted? You’re Now at Highest Risk of COVID

Ever since the announcement that the COVID “vaccines” would be using novel mRNA gene transfer technology, I and many others have warned that this appears to be a very bad idea.

Numerous potential mechanisms for harm have been identified and detailed in previous articles, and we’re now seeing some of our worst fears come to bear. “Fully vaccinated” individuals are both more likely to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 and more likely to die, whether from COVID or some other cause.

As reported by investigative journalist Jeffrey Jaxen in the April 22, 2022, Highwire video above, data from Walgreens’ COVID-19 tracker6 reveal that COVID-jabbed individuals are testing positive for COVID at higher rates than the unjabbed. What’s more, people who got their last shot five months or more ago have the highest risk.

As you can see in the screenshot below, during the week of April 19 through 25, 2022, 13% of unvaccinated tested positive for COVID (with Omicron being the predominant variant). (The data reviewed by Jaxen are from the week of April 10 through 16.)

Of those who received two doses five months or more ago, 23.1% tested positive, and of those who received a third dose five months or more ago, the positive rate was 26.3%. So, after the first booster shot (the third dose), people are at greatest risk of testing positive for COVID.

CLICK HERE TO VIE THE INFOGRAPHIC: POSITIVITY RATE BY VACCINATION STATUS 04/19/2022 – 04/25/2022

A deeper dive into the data7 reveals that two doses appear to have been protective for a short while, but after five months, it becomes net harmful. The group faring worst of all is the 12 to 17 cohort, where no one with one dose tested positive, but after the second dose, cases suddenly appear, and get higher still after five months. After the third dose, positive cases drop a bit, but then shoot up higher than ever after five months.8

Deaths by Vaccination Status in the UK

Data sets from the U.K. government reveal an equally disturbing trend. The raw data from the Office for National Statistics9 is difficult to interpret, so Jaxen had data analysts create a bar graph to better illustrate what the data actually tell us. A screenshot from Jaxen’s report is below.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE INFOGRAPHIC: ENGLAND – ALL CAUSE MORTALITY RISK (%) BY VACCINATION STATUS COMPARED TO UNVACCINATED

Bars going upward are a good thing, as it indicates the risk for all-cause mortality based on vaccination status is either normal or reduced. Bars that dip below zero percent are indicative of increased all-cause mortality, based on vaccination status.

As you can see, the all-cause mortality rate is between 100% and 300% greater among people who got their first dose 21 days or more ago. The risk for all-cause death is also significantly elevated among those who got their second dose at least six months ago, and mildly elevated among those who got their third dose less than 21 days ago. As of January 2022, all who got one or more doses at least 21 days ago were dying at significantly elevated rates.

More Jabs, More COVID Deaths

 Everywhere we look, we find trends showing the COVID shots are resulting in higher death rates. Above is an animated illustration10 from Our World In Data, first showing the vaccination rates of South America, North America, Europe and Africa, from mid-December 2020 through the third week of April 2022, followed by the cumulative confirmed COVID deaths per million in those countries during that same timeframe.

Africa has had a consistently low vaccination rate throughout, while North America, Europe and South America all have had rapidly rising vaccination rates. Africa has also had a consistently low COVID mortality rate, although a slight rise began around September 2021. Still, it’s nowhere near the COVID death rates of North America, South America and Europe, all of which saw dramatic increases.

Here’s another one,11 also sourced from Our World In Data, first showing the excess death rate in the U.S. (the cumulative number of deaths from all causes compared to projections based on previous years), between January 26, 2020, and January 30, 2022, followed by an illustration of the tandem rise of vaccine doses administered and the excess mortality rate. It clearly shows that as vaccination rates rose, so did the excess mortality rate.

Risk-Benefit Analysis Condemns the COVID Jabs

At this point, we also have the benefit of more than one risk-benefit analysis, and all show that, with very few exceptions, the COVID jabs do more harm than good. For example, a risk-benefit analysis12 by Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and independent researcher Kathy Dopp, published in mid-February 2022, concluded that the COVID jab is deadlier than COVID-19 itself for anyone under the age of 80.

They looked at publicly available official data from the U.S. and U.K. for all age groups, and compared all-cause mortality to the risk of dying from COVID-19. “All age groups under 50 years old are at greater risk of fatality after receiving a COVID-19 inoculation than an unvaccinated person is at risk of a COVID-19 death,” Seneff and Dopp concluded. And for younger adults and children, there’s no benefit, only risk.

“This analysis is conservative,” the authors note, “because it ignores the fact that inoculation-induced adverse events such as thrombosis, myocarditis, Bell’s palsy, and other vaccine-induced injuries can lead to shortened life span.

When one takes into consideration the fact that there is approximately a 90% decrease in risk of COVID-19 death if early treatment is provided to all symptomatic high-risk persons, one can only conclude that mandates of COVID-19 inoculations are ill-advised.

Considering the emergence of antibody-resistant variants like Delta and Omicron, for most age groups COVID-19 vaccine inoculations result in higher death rates than COVID-19 does for the unvaccinated.”

The analysis is also conservative in the sense that it only considers COVID jab fatalities that occur within one month of injection. As demonstrated by the U.K. data above, the risk of all-cause death is nearly 300% greater for those who got a second dose at least six months ago.

Teens Are at Dramatic Risk of Death From the Jabs

Similarly, an analysis13 of data in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) by researchers Spiro Pantazatos and Herve Seligmann suggests that in those under age 18, the shots only increase the risk of death from COVID, and there’s no point at which the shot can prevent a single COVID death, no matter how many are vaccinated.

If you’re under 18, you’re a whopping 51 times more likely to die from the jab than you are to die from COVID if not vaccinated. In the 18 to 29 age range, the shot will kill 16 for every person it saves from dying from COVID, and in the 30 to 39 age range, the expected number of vaccine fatalities to prevent a single COVID death is 15.

Only when you get into the 60 and older categories do the risks between the jab and COVID infection even out. In the 60 to 69 age group, the shot will kill one person for every person it saves from dying of COVID, so it’s a tossup as to whether it might be worth it for any given person.

How Many Are We Willing to Sacrifice?

We also have a risk-benefit analysis by researchers in Germany and The Netherlands. The analysis was initially published June 24, 2021, in the journal Vaccines.14 The paper caused an uproar among the editorial board, with some of them resigning in protest.15 In the end, the journal simply retracted it — a strategy that appears to have become norm.

After a thorough re-review, the paper was republished in the August 2021 issue of Science, Public Health Policy and the Law.16 The analysis found that, “very likely for three deaths prevented by vaccination we will have to accept that about two people die as a consequence of these vaccinations,” the authors wrote in a Letter to the Editor17 of Clinical and Translational Discovery. Defending their work, they went on to note that:18

“The database we based our analysis on was a large naturalistic study of the BioNTech vaccine in Israel. This was the only study at the time that allowed for a direct estimation of an absolute risk reduction (ARR) in mortality.

Admittedly, the ARR estimate was only available for a short observation period of 4 weeks after the first vaccine dose, a point raised by critics. One might have wanted a longer observation period to bring out the benefit of vaccinations more clearly, and our estimate of a number needed to vaccinate (NNV) of 16 000 to prevent one death might have been overly conservative.

The recently published 6-month interim report of the BioNTech-regulatory clinical trial now covers a period long enough to let us look at this risk benefit ratio once again. In Table S4 of this publication, 14 deaths are reported in the placebo group (n = 21 921) and 15 in the vaccination group (n = 21 926).

Among them, two deaths in the placebo-group were attributed to COVID-19, and one in the vaccination group was attributed to COVID-19 pneumonia. This leads to an ARR = 4.56 × 10–5, and conversely to an NNV = 1/ARR = 21 916 to prevent one death by COVID-19. This shows that our original estimate was not so far off the mark.

The most recent safety report of the German Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI) that covers all reported side effects since the vaccination campaign began (27 December 2020 until 30 November 202119 … reports 0.02 deaths per 1000 BioNTech vaccinations or 2 per 100 000 vaccinations.

We had gleaned four mortality cases per 100 000 vaccinations (all vaccines) from the Dutch pharmacovigilance database LAREB. Using the data of Thomas et al., a liberal NNV = 20 000, we can calculate that by 100 000 vaccinations we save five lives.

Using the PEI pharmacovigilance report for the same product, we see that these 100 000 vaccinations are associated with two deaths, while using the LAREB database back in June 2021, they were associated with four deaths across all vaccines and are associated with two deaths in the most recent reports concerning the BioNTech vaccine … In other words, as we vaccinate 100 000 persons, we might save five lives but risk two to four deaths.”

The risk-benefit ratio may be even worse than that, though, as these calculations do not take into account the fact that passive pharmacovigilance data “are notorious for underestimating casualties and side effects,” the authors note, or the fact that severe side effects such as myocarditis are affecting young males at a staggering rate, which can reduce lifespan in the longer term.

We Do Not Have a Functioning Pharmacovigilance System

In an August 2021 editorial, editor-in-chief of Science, Public Health Policy and the Law, James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., wrote:20

“There are two messages from those who hold appointed offices or other influential positions in Public Health on long-term vaccine safety.

The first message is that long-term randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trials are not necessary for the long-term study of vaccine safety because we have ‘pharmacovigilance’; i.e. long- term post-market safety surveillance that is supported by widely accessible, passive vaccine adverse events tracking systems.

The second message is that any use of those very same vaccine adverse events tracking systems that leads to the inference or conclusion that vaccines might cause serious adverse events or death is unsupported by such systems …

When those seeking support for public health initiatives, such as a new vaccination program, offer evidence that long-term vaccine safety studies are well in hand due to the possibility of detecting adverse events that happened following vaccination, they are either:

(a) unaware that the vaccine adverse events tracking systems upon which they are basing their confidence about society’s ability to detect and track vaccine adverse events are alleged to be unable to be used to infer causal links between health outcomes and vaccination exposure, or:

(b) participating in a disinformation campaign to end scrutiny over the absence of properly controlled long-term randomized clinical trials to assess long- term vaccine safety. Neither of these is sufficient empirical basis for the knowledge claim of long- term safety …

There must be room for disagreement in science; otherwise, science does not exist. It is sad to bear witness to the fact that science has degenerated into a war against unwanted and inconvenient results, conclusions and interpretations via the process of post-publication retraction for issues other than fraud, grave error in execution, and plagiarism.

The weaponization of the process of retraction of scientific studies is well underway, and it induces a bias that could be called “retraction bias”, or, in the case in which a few persons haunt journals in search of studies that cast doubt on their commercial products, a ‘ghouling bias,’ which leads to biased systematic reviews and warped meta-analyses.”

In his editorial, Lyons-Weiler specifically criticized the Vaccine journal for its retraction of the risk-benefit analysis cited above, and mocked the editorial board members who quit in protest, noting that “Rage-quitting is not science.”

“The resigning editorial board members’ knowledge claim is that no deaths have occurred due to the vaccination program. As helpful as that claim might be to a prescribed narrative, it is not based on empirical evidence, and it is, therefore, unwarranted,” Lyons-Weiler wrote.21

“From a Popperian view of science, one can see the fatal flaw in the editorial board members’ knowledge claim: if, as they insist, passive vaccine adverse events tracking systems cannot test the hypothesis of causality, then how can editorial board members, resigning or otherwise, know that the events were NOT caused by the vaccine? …

It is logical to conclude that since passive vaccine adverse event tracking systems do not lend themselves well to testing hypotheses of causality, they do not provide the opportunity to design and conduct sufficiently critical tests of causality, and therefore a replacement system is needed … one that is suitable to detect risk.”

While we may indeed need better pharmacovigilance, there’s really no doubt at this point that the COVID jabs are ill-advised for most people. I believe that in the years to come, people will look back at this time and vow to never repeat it. In the meantime, all we can do is look at and assess the data we do have, and make decisions accordingly.

Sources and References

Guilty Secrets and The Fall of the National Health Service in the UK

/in , , , , , /by

AUTHORS NOTE: These are my views as a woman living in England, on how the culture and spirit of my country has changed over 50 years.  Why the country does not feel protected or strong any more, how it has lost, and is losing it values and decency, and how we are daily losing our free speech.

“But don’t be afraid of those who threaten you. For the time is coming when everything that is covered will be revealed, and all that is secret will be made known to all.  What I tell you now in the darkness, shout abroad when daybreak comes. What I whisper in your ear, shout from the housetops for all
to hear!”   Matthew 10:26-28

I have a very guilty secret. I have been watching the Johnny Depp versus Amber Heard court case on a daily basis.  It is intriguing.   I have also followed it up with an analysis by body language experts to see if I agree with their observations.  One of whom schools the G7 participants!  I have been late for appointments and late going to bed.  One could say it has been a massive ‘distraction’.  It has certainly been exhausting.

It is a fascinating insight into how lies and abuse can be so manipulated that an innocent person can be become the villain, and vice-versa.  I am now wondering how many people who having watched this have made the correlation of this drama being conducted, into the experiences that we go through in life, and have especially related it to the drama we are all going through now?

Are you a perpetrator, a victim, or a survivor in life from abuse? Or just an innocent bystander?   What is the truth? They are hard questions we should all ask ourselves.

After listening to the exhaustive testimony of Johnny Depp without any interruption or cross examining, I thought how fortunate he was to have had the privilege of being able to tell his story.  Some people just don’t get the opportunity.   It was painful to listen to and yet insightful.   Yes, so called ‘fact checker’s’ were on hand, and some tried to trip him up and silence him, but on the whole free speech was allowed.

I identified with some of his stories and his mannerisms.  His lazy left eye, his stumbling over words, wrong accusations, the injustice and the bullying and the shame.   I also remembered how at some periods in life those childhood resentments had manifested in me and I had inflicted them on others.   However, as in all scenarios I think the one thing which I really identified with is that there somewhere there is always ‘Truth’ and above all else this is something we strive and long for regardless of the pain of our own mistakes. Maybe this is why I am watching this so intently.

Truth is light on a dark day.  It is clean and decent.  It requires no guessing, no prompts, no acting.   It possesses common sense.  It sets you free.

Mutiny on the Bounty

Truthfully, loving others, or loving your neighbor, as the Bible would instruct, has been particularly difficult these last few years, as I am sure it has been for many readers.

Although I am not a nurse, working in the health service, for me, has been particularly challenging to say the least.   It has been disturbing to know the harm that may have been caused to both adults and children alike, both physically and psychologically.

Exposing the sheer hypocrisy on what has been promoted as a world-wide ‘health initiative’ to protect our health, minus any risk assessment, long term data, or any type of acknowledgement to the damage that may be caused by an mRNA injectable, together with the long term use of plastic face masks, has seen some staff persecuted in my work environment, discriminated against, bullied and also accused of being selfish in their failure to comply or even quietly question some of the orders being forced upon them.

I would like to say that in witnessing this I have been like the pirate Jack Sparrow, and taken my sword, my eye-liner and boots, and stamped out the evilness of the one-eyed masters of lies and treachery, who with a ‘common-purpose’ mission, together with some neuro-linguistic programming, have seen themselves as the new and more insightful leaders of our society bullying my colleagues into submission.

The most I have done is refuse to walk the plank, worn a bit of concealer, and now with a bitter-sweet smile stand divided alongside thousands of unseen others in our health service who don’t want to cause a mutiny, but no longer feel loyal to the system who recently threatened to throw them overboard for questioning a vaccination, based on the orders of the actor Captain Johnson, the Prime Minister, who certainly likes to party.

I am very aware that for light relief, many succumbed to the pressure of not being able to stand firm or alone in what can only be considered coercive and ‘abusive’, and that there are some who feel proud at having become fully compliant into a belief they are now more competent and somehow more caring.   It is a crazy mix.     There are also many others who now also feel isolated themselves and regret having fallen to the oppressor.

We must always remember that.

How do you love or trust someone who has used you but then tells you to do as you are told otherwise there will be consequences?

Because of this, many have distanced themselves. The have jumped ship from the National Health Service.   It is my personal belief it was that they have been unable to take the injustice and no longer feel motivated by the system they have been loyally serving.  For six months prior to April 2022, health care workers had been told to take the vaccination, or else lose their job, although the terminology used was ‘deployed’ to a non-patient facing role.   However, this requirement was also extended to non-patient facing staff who had been ‘scoped’ as potentially coming into contact with a patient.  GP’s and doctors have also moved on, left or retired.

Warning ‘many’ care workers will not return to jobs despite vaccine rule change | Nursing Times

In responding to the latest GP workforce Data, January 2022.   Dr Farah Jameel, GPC England chair at the BMA, is quoted as saying,

“At a time of significant upheaval, long waiting lists and increasing sickness in our communities, it is a terrible indictment of the current state of the NHS that highly qualified GPs are leaving the profession in such large numbers. The latest data show that over the last year England has lost the equivalent of 279 fully qualified full-time GPs, with 91 having left in the last month alone. This loss of 91 GPs works out as the equivalent of more than 200,000 patients having lost their family doctor between December and January”

Declining number of GPs shows no signs of abating without a workable plan to recruit and retain NHS staff, says BMA – BMA media centre – BMA,

Unvaccinated nursing staff who have remained and have always dedicated their lives into caring for others who were told they would now not lose their jobs, have also discovered that the re-validation requirements that they require to practice may in the future require evidence of a vaccination.  From personal experience I am aware that applying for a job in the NHS, whatever it might be, also requires revealing your vaccination status.

News | Royal College of Nursing (rcn.org.uk)

Jobs Not Jabs (UK) – Proposed group action for healthcare

The National Health Service, known as the NHS which the British were once so proud of is apparently sinking.

Founded in July 1948, in the UK, it has been one of the biggest employers in the world.    Employing over 1.3 million staff it has been promoted as being a government funded medical and health care service which anyone can freely use.   However, contrary, to the narrative of it being a free health service, the NHS is actually publicly funded for by the taxpayer, and in some areas, such as in the case of prescriptions or private consultations; patients do have to pay for that service.   In some areas such as dentistry or ophthalmology, payments are also made, albeit at a reduced rate in comparison to private care in those fields.

In 2019, prior to the pandemic it was announced by Boris Johnson that there was a bounty of gold amounting to £34 billion being put into the NHS to save it.   I’m sure it won him some favor, but in light of how the money has been mis-used, the continual cry of the NHS needing even more money to still save it is becoming tiring in the face of what we have now witnessed and experienced.

The £20.5 billion NHS England spending increase is the largest five year increase since the mid-2000s – Full Fact

The mental health of people is a real world-wide epidemic which is now taking place.    The harm we have inflicted upon children has always outweighed the risks of a virus.

It is also reported that whistleblowing by care home staff was up by 66% during Covid 19.   Vulnerable adults should have always had a family member or guardian to physically visit and support them.  Elderly patients who were discharged from hospital were also placed in care homes across the UK and were not tested for Covid 19.

Former minister Baroness Altmann said the “shocking rise” in whistleblowing complaints was “clear evidence” of a “broken social care system”.

Jayne Connery, founder and director of Care Campaign for the Vulnerable, said she was “saddened” but not surprised by the rise in complaints. Jayne said the corresponding fall in safeguarding reporting was because local authorities and the CQC were not visiting care homes

Whistleblowing by care home staff up 66% during COVID-19 (carehomeprofessional.com)

COVID-19: Government acted unlawfully when it sent patients into care homes without coronavirus testing | UK News | Sky News

Dr Cathy Gardener, whose father died from Covid in a care home after untested patients were sent there from hospital, also took legal action against Health Secretary Sajid Javid, NHS England and Public Health England.

Despite the request by the government to throw the case out, in a ruling made in April this year, it was concluded that the government indeed acted unlawfully.

Knowingly, or unknowingly, this is the abuse which has been inflicted upon us.  Various spokespersons including thousands of professional and qualified health professionals and scientists world-wide have tried to warn others.    They have even exposed the abusers to the detriment of their own livelihood.   Missiles were thrown at them.   The isolation and the division that has now been created in the workplace is heartbreaking.   I don’t believe it can be repaired.

Working in the health service I have witnessed some very dedicated staff.   Some of them I have known for over 17 years.  They are like family to me.   I am aware that some have been vaccinated and some have not.   I am much more aware of those who have been vaccinated as they still have much more freedom to talk about it.  Sometimes I notice they seem indifferent to the fact that others are not afforded the same freedom or respect.  There is sometimes a silence now as I watch from a distance not knowing what will happen long term to those who are still part of this psychological trial and the experiment which has taken place upon us, but   I am encouraged that more people are coming forward to talk about the adverse reactions that have been experienced from the vaccination and that people are becoming more aware of the yellow card system where doctors should record side-affects.

Exclusive: Sir Christopher Chope MP on vaccine adverse reactions and the need for compensation | UKColumn

However, who can count the number of psychological problems, the pain, the division and the hurt that has been created in the home and the workplace.

This is Domestic Abuse.

The jury will soon be out on the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case.  The outcome will soon be revealed. I can hardly wait.

Are you a perpetrator, a victim, or a survivor in life from abuse?   What is the truth? These are hard questions we should all ask ourselves.

©Shirley Edwards. All rights reserved.

Links

Warning ‘many’ care workers will not return to jobs despite vaccine rule change | Nursing Times

Declining number of GPs shows no signs of abating without a workable plan to recruit and retain NHS staff, says BMA – BMA media centre – BMANews | Royal College of Nursing (rcn.org.uk)

Jobs Not Jabs (UK) – Proposed group action for healthcare

The £20.5 billion NHS England spending increase is the largest five year increase since the mid-2000s – Full Fact

Exclusive: Sir Christopher Chope MP on vaccine adverse reactions and the need for compensation | UKColumn

ANIMAL CRUELTY: New Report Reveals the Federal Government Is Spending Millions To Get Animals High

/in , , , , , , , /by

Research indicates that the federal government is actually responsible for the vast majority of animal cruelty in the country.

Animal rights groups like PETA raise millions of dollars per year and spend their time dumping fake blood on celebrities’ fur coats. Even more radical groups like the Animal Liberation Front set restaurants that sell meat on fire and torch research labs.

But a new report from the White Coat Waste Project (WCW), a free-market based animal rights group, indicates these organizations should probably be directing their fury at a much bigger culprit: the government.

That’s right. Research indicates that the federal government is actually responsible for the vast majority of animal cruelty in the country. According to WCW, the government spends millions of taxpayer dollars every year on animal laboratories that carry out unethical testing on animals through grants, contracts, and experiments within its own labs.

In a new report, Up In Smoke, WCW exposes even more of these corrupt practices. In particular, they detail millions of taxpayer dollars the government recently spent on cannabis and e-cigarette animal experiments—and rampant violations of federal spending transparency law that were committed in the process.

In one experiment, “pregnant mice were confined to a chamber, where they were forced to breathe e-cigarette vapor for hours.” According to the report, “After giving birth, their pups underwent behavioral tests, and were then killed and their brains analyzed. However, experimenters openly acknowledged significant differences between rodent brain development and human brain development.”

Another experiment forced mice to breath a variety of flavored e-cigarette vapors to “study the effects of vaping on the heart.” But notably, the authors said that “caution should be exercised when extrapolating the findings in the mouse heart to the human heart due to the presence of many obvious differences including those related to important species differences.”

So, in short, our government has been hotboxing mice for no apparent reason—they aren’t even producing research that could improve human health.

There are other problems detailed in the report as well. For instance, the Stevens Amendment is an old federal policy that requires public disclosure of taxpayer monies spent, yet WCW reports that not one experiment detailed in their report was in compliance with that law.

This is the second time in under a year that abusive animal testing by our government has come to light. Just a few months ago it was revealed that Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided a grant to a lab in Tunisia to torture and kill beagle puppies for scientific experiments.

These revelations are chilling. But they really won’t surprise anyone who is even vaguely familar with the practices of our government.

While our Founders intended the US to be a bastion of human rights and ethics, decades of rampant spending with little accountability have spawned a sprawling federal system that is anything but this. We see this leviathon bombing innocent civilians in other countries, persecuting journalists and whistleblowers who tell the truth about the government’s actions, and condemning thousands of innocent Americans to life behind bars for nonviolent offenses. Is it any wonder they also do not value the lives of animals? Hardly.

There’s a cruel irony here, too. While the government locks American citizens in jail for cannabis use with its right hand, it’s turning around and drugging animals with the same product with its left.

As economist Ludwig von Mises once said, “The worst evils which mankind has ever had to endure were inflicted by bad governments.”

This report is yet further proof of what many in the libertarian camp have long known: government is the real source of most of the evil in this world. But unlike when individuals do something wrong, there is little to no accountability for government actors when they carry out actions that would land the rest of us in jail.

AUTHOR

Hannah Cox

Hannah Cox is the Content Manager and Brand Ambassador for the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

FLORIDA: Illegal Drug Deaths Have Skyrocketed in the Sunshine State Since Legalizing Marijuana

/in , , , , , , /by

In 2014, Democrat John Morgan decided that he wanted to legalize the use of marijuana in Florida. His first attempt in 2014 failed. However, on December 17th, 2015 the Florida Supreme Court approved a constitutional amendment, drafted by  John Morgan and United for Care, that called for the legalization of medical marijuana. The state ruled it valid for placement on the Florida 2016 ballot.

Because of John Morgan and United for Care on November 8th, 2016, Floridians voted in favor of Amendment 2.

Today a variety of Cannabis Based Products (CBP) are now available in most Florida supermarkets and pharmacies including CVS, Walgreens, Publix and Walmart.

Fast forward to today and we find the Florida Department of Law Enforcement reporting, “There were a total of 134,396 arrests for Drugs/Narcotics Offenses reported in 2018. Of these arrests, 5,404 were juveniles and 128,992 were adults.”

Marijuana as Gate-Way Drug

Many studies have looked at marijuana to determine if it is a “gateway drug” that leads to the use and abuse of other drugs, both legal and illegal.

The National Library of Medicine published a paper titled “Cannabis as a Gateway Drug for Opioid Use Disorder” by professor Arthur Robin Williams. Professor Williams noted:

[O]ne study published by the American Academy of Pediatrics documents findings from one analysis that adolescents who use cannabis are 104 times more likely to use cocaine than adolescents who never use cannabis. There are significant differences between these two populations of adolescents predating the onset of cannabis use. These observations are often used by proponents of cannabis legalization to disregard the possibility that the adolescent use of cannabis may, in and of itself, create de novo risk for the use of opioids or other drugs that otherwise would not exist. This review discusses recent scientific discoveries that address neuropathophysiological mechanisms whereby cannabis use could biologically introduce additional risk for the likelihood of opioid initiation, dose escalation, and OUD that otherwise might not occur within the same individual.

Drug Deaths in Florida

The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) published a report on opioid related drug deaths in Florida.  They NIDA report stated:

Nearly 68% of the 4,698 reported drug overdose deaths in Florida involved opioids in 2018—a total of 3,189 fatalities (and a rate of 15.8) (Figure 1).

  • Deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone (mainly fentanyl and fentanyl analogs) remained stable but high with 2,091 in 2018 (a rate of 10.7).
  • Deaths involving heroin and prescription opioids also remained steady with a respective 689 (a rate of 3.5) and 1,282 (a rate of 6.0) reported in 2018.3

If you look at Figure Figure 1 you will find the following:

  • Since 2015 heroine deaths have risen from less 500 in 2015 to 2,091 in 2018.
  • Prescription opioid deaths have risen from under 1,000 in 2015 to 1,282 in 2018.
  • Synthetic opioid deaths have risen from under 500 in 2015 to 2,091 in 2018.
  • Overall opioid deaths have doubled from 1,500 in 2015 to 3,189 in 2018.

In the 2020 Florida Medical Examiners Commission Report “Drugs Identified by Deceased Person” found.

The State of Florida’s Bureau of Vital Statistics reported 243,088 deaths in Florida during 2020. Of the 44,577* deaths investigated by Florida’s medical examiners, toxicology results determined that the drugs listed below were present at the time of death in 14,708 deaths. The medical examiners assessed whether the drug(s) identified was the cause of death or merely present at the time of death. The data were then submitted to the Medical Examiners Commission (MEC) for presentation in this report. It is important to note that each death is a single case, while each time a drug is detected represents an occurrence. The vast majority of the 14,708 deaths had more than one drug occurrence.

Here are the “other” drugs listed in the Florida Medical Examiner report:

• Cannabinoids
• Carisoprodol/Meprobamate
• Cathinones
• Cocaine
• Gabapentin
• GHB
• Ketamine
• Mitragynine
• Sympathomimetic Amines
• Synthetic Cannabinoids
• Zolpidem

The Bottom Line

According to an October 6th, 2020 Forbes article titled “More People Were Arrested For Cannabis Last Year Than For All Violent Crimes Put Together, According To FBI DataEmily Earlenbaugh reported,

Currently 33 states allow for at least some type of medical cannabis use and 11 allow for adult recreational use.

[ … ]

The data from the FBI’s report revealed that police arrested 545,602 people for cannabis related crimes in 2019. That arrest rate is 9% higher than the 495,871 people arrested for violent crimes the same year. And those being arrested for cannabis aren’t just those making money from selling, growing or manufacturing the drug – they are mostly just people who use cannabis. The vast majority of these arrests (92%) were for simple possession of the drug. 500,395 of those arrested for cannabis were simply found in possession of cannabis. Even if we take out all the arrests for being involved in unregulated cannabis commerce and just focus on arrests for cannabis possession, the numbers still outpace arrests for violent crimes.

[ … ]

“Police across America make a marijuana-related arrest every 58 seconds,” explains Erik Altieri, the Executive Director for cannabis advocacy group NORML.

Read more.

On Thursday, February 17th, 2022 in Port Everglades, Florida the U.S. Coast Guard seized about 54,500 pounds of cocaine and about 15,800 pounds of marijuana worth $1.6 billion on the street.

Florida has a serious drug problem and the legalization of marijuana (cannabinoids and synthetic cannabinoids), has not helped Floridians but has in fact killed Floridians.

According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse:

In 2018, Florida providers wrote 53.7 opioid prescriptions for every 100 persons, compared to the average U.S. rate of 51.4 prescriptions.

On March 16th, 2022 Attorney General Ashley Moody warned Floridians of a new, deadly synthetic opioid found in Florida called Isotonitazene—commonly referred to as ISO. According to reports, ISO is approximately 20 to 100 times stronger than fentanyl—an already incredibly dangerous opioid. Similar to fentanyl, this new synthetic opioid is being mixed with other drugs and appearing in the illicit drug market—possibly in powder or pill form. Often, users have no idea that a lethal synthetic opioid is mixed into a drug until it is too late. Attorney General Moody is sounding the alarm and asking people to never take an illicit drug because just one pill can kill.

Attorney General Ashley Moody said,

“For years, we have been warning about the dangers of fentanyl and how just one pill laced with this synthetic opioid can kill. Now, there is a new, deadlier drug being found in Florida. Isotonitazene, also known as ISO, is so strong that it can kill just by coming in contact with someone’s skin or being accidentally inhaled. ISO has already been linked to overdose deaths in Florida, so please, never take any illicit drug and know that using just one time could cost you your life.”

Pasco County Sheriff Chris Nocco said,

“ISO is a dangerous substance that we have, unfortunately, seen in Pasco County. As law enforcement continues to have to address the healthcare crisis of substance abuse, our goal remains to save lives and protect our community, which is why we have highlighted and brought awareness to the impact this dangerous substance has in our community.”

Since 2015 more and more illegal drugs are flowing into the Sunshine State and harming our youth, all thanks to the efforts by John Morgan and United for Care to legalize marijuana!

CLICK HERE FOR: Florida Department of Law Enforcement: 2020 Crimes against Society by County Data

Thanks John, for nothing.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: More People Were Arrested For Cannabis Last Year Than For All Violent Crimes Put Together, According To FBI Data

Cannabis: How it affects our cognition and psychology

/in , , , , , , /by

Teen cannabis use has been reported as a risk factor for psychotic experiences as well as schizophrenia.

Cannabis has been used by humans for thousands of years and is one of the most popular drugs today. With effects such as feelings of joy and relaxation, it is also legal to prescribe or take in several countries.

But how does using the drug affect the mind? In three recent studies, published in The Journal of Psychopharmacology, Neuropsychopharmacology and the International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, we show that it can influence a number of cognitive and psychological processes.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported that, in 2018, approximately 192 million people worldwide aged between 15 and 64 used cannabis recreationally. Young adults are particularly keen, with 35% of people between the ages of 18 and 25 using it, while only 10% of people over the age of 26 do.

This indicates that the main users are adolescents and young adults, whose brains are still in development. They may therefore be particularly vulnerable to the effects of cannabis use on the brain in the longer term.

Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the main psychoactive compound in cannabis. It acts on the brain’s “endocannabinoid system”, which are receptors which respond to the chemical components of cannabis. The cannabis receptors are densely populated in prefrontal and limbic areas in the brain, which are involved in reward and motivation. They regulate signalling of the brain chemicals dopamine, gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate.

We know that dopamine is involved in motivation, reward and learning. GABA and glutamate play a part in cognitive processes, including learning and memory.

Cognitive effects

Cannabis use can affect cognition, especially in those with cannabis-use disorder. This is characterised by the persistent desire to use the drug and disruption to daily activities, such as work or education. It has been estimated that approximately 10% of cannabis users meet the diagnostic criteria for this disorder.

In our research, we tested the cognition of 39 people with the disorder (asked to be clean on the day of testing), and compared it with that of 20 people who never or rarely used cannabis. We showed that participants with the condition had significantly worse performance on memory tests from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) compared to the controls, who had either never or very rarely used cannabis. It also negatively affected their “executive functions”, which are mental processes including flexible thinking. This effect seemed to be linked to the age at which people started taking the drug – the younger they were, the more impaired their executive functioning was.

Cognitive impairments have been noted in mild cannabis users as well. Such users tend to make riskier decisions than others and have more problems with planning.

Although most studies have been conducted in males, there has been evidence of sex differences in the effects of cannabis use on cognition. We showed that, while male cannabis users had poorer memory for visually recognising things, female users had more problems with attention and executive functions. These sex effects persisted when controlling for age; IQ; alcohol and nicotine use; mood and anxiety symptoms; emotional stability; and impulsive behaviour.

Reward, motivation and mental health

Cannabis use can also affect how we feel – thereby further influencing our thinking. For example, some previous research has suggested that reward and motivation – along with the brain circuits involved in these processes – can be disrupted when we use cannabis. This may affect our performance at school or work as it can make us feel less motivated to work hard, and less rewarded when we do well.

In our recent study, we used a brain imaging task, in which participants were placed in a scanner and viewed orange or blue squares. The orange squares would lead to a monetary reward, after a delay, if the participant made a response. This set up helped us investigate how the brain responds to rewards. We focused particularly on the ventral striatum, which is a key region in the brain’s reward system. We found that the effects on the reward system in the brain were subtle, with no direct effects of cannabis in the ventral striatum. However, the participants in our study were moderate cannabis users. The effects may be more pronounced in cannabis users with more severe and chronic use, as seen in cannabis use disorder.

There is also evidence that cannabis can lead to mental health problems. We have shown that it is related to higher “anhedonia” – an inability to feel pleasure – in adolescents. Interestingly, this effect was particularly pronounced during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns.

Cannabis use during adolescence has also been reported as a risk factor for developing psychotic experiences as well as schizophrenia. One study showed that cannabis use moderately increases the risk of psychotic symptoms in young people, but that it has a much stronger effect in those with a predisposition for psychosis (scoring highly on a symptom checklist of paranoid ideas and psychoticism).

Assessing 2,437 adolescents and young adults (14-24 years), the authors reported a six percentage points increased risk – from 15% to 21% – of psychotic symptoms in cannabis users without a predisposition for psychosis. But there was a 26-point increase in risk – from 25% to 51% – of psychotic symptoms in cannabis users with a predisposition for psychosis.

We don’t really know why cannabis is linked to psychotic episodes, but hypotheses suggests dopamine and glutamate may be important in the neurobiology of these conditions.

Another study of 780 teenagers suggested that the association between cannabis use and psychotic experiences was also linked to a brain region called the “uncus”. This lies within the parahippocampus (involved in memory) and olfactory bulb (involved in processing smells), and has a large amount of cannabinoid receptors. It has also previously been associated with schizophrenia and psychotic experiences.

Cognitive and psychological effects of cannabis use are ultimately likely to depend to some extent on dosage (frequency, duration and strength), sex, genetic vulnerabilities and age of onset. But we need to determine whether these effects are temporary or permanent. One article summarising many studies has suggested that with mild cannabis use, the effects may weaken after periods of abstinence.

But even if that’s the case, it is clearly worth considering the effects that prolonged cannabis use can have on our minds – particularly for young people whose brains are still developing.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

AUTHORS

Barbara Sahakian

Professor Barbara J Sahakian is based at the University of Cambridge Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute. Sahakian is also an Honorary Clinical Psychologist at… More by Barbara Sahakian

Christelle Langley

Dr. Christelle Langley is a Cognitive Neuroscientist, she received her PhD from the University of Bristol in 2018. Her PhD focused on understanding the relationship between fatigue and cognition in Multiple… More by Christelle Langley

Martine Skumlien

Martine Skumlien is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Cambridge Department of Psychiatry, supervised by Professor Barbara J Sahakian. Her research aims to understand the potential impact of cannabis… More by Martine Skumlien

Tianye Jia

I had my PhD training in Computational Genomics at the University of Birmingham and then joined the IMAGEN project at King’s College London as a bioinformatician. From Dec 2017, I returned to Fudan University… More by Tianye Jia

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Popular Pill Exposed; Was This Intentional Mass Murder?

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Another Layer of Corruption in the Opioid Scandal Revealed

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • In 2021, McKinsey & Company, one of the largest consultants to corporations and governments worldwide, settled a lawsuit brought by 47 state attorneys general over its role in the U.S. opioid crisis
  • A U.S. House investigation reveals McKinsey was advising the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on the safety of opioids, while at the same time advising Purdue how to maximize sales
  • Jeff Smith, a senior McKinsey consultant, worked on a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) for OxyContin while simultaneously advising the FDA about the drug’s safety
  • McKinsey promoted its FDA connections when pitching services to its pharmaceutical clients. The FDA, meanwhile, claims it had no idea McKinsey was working with Purdue
  • Purdue knew the dangers of its drug, covered it up, and hired FDA insiders to advise its sales strategy and how to influence the FDA. They also hired Publicis to manage its marketing. Publicis, the world’s largest PR company, funds and partners with “fact checking” organizations to suppress and censor the truth

In 2021, McKinsey & Company, one of the largest consultants to corporations and governments worldwide, settled a lawsuit brought by 47 state attorneys general over its role in the U.S. opioid crisis. The firm agreed to pay $573 million in fines1 for driving up sales of Purdue Pharma’s OxyContin painkiller, even as Americans were dying in droves.

Between 1999 and 2019, nearly 500,000 Americans died from overdoses involving opioid drugs,2 and false advertising and bribery were at the heart of this tragedy. As reported by The New York Times:3

“McKinsey’s extensive work with Purdue included advising it to focus on selling lucrative high-dose pills, the records show, even after the drugmaker pleaded guilty in 2007 to federal criminal charges that it had misled doctors and regulators about OxyContin’s risks. The firm also told Purdue that it could ‘band together’ with other opioid makers to head off ‘strict treatment’ by the Food and Drug Administration.”

Worse Than We Thought

We now find out that the situation is even more corrupt than we previously thought. A U.S. House investigation4,5,6 into McKinsey, based on materials obtained through the discovery process of this and other lawsuits, has revealed McKinsey was advising the FDA on the safety of opioids, while at the same time advising Purdue how to maximize sales.

In one instance, McKinsey wrote “scripts” for Purdue to use in its meeting with the FDA to discuss the safety of OxyContin in pediatric populations. In another, Jeff Smith, a senior McKinsey consultant, worked on a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) for OxyContin while simultaneously advising the FDA about the drug’s safety.7

As noted by investigative journalist Paul Thacker,8 “Just think about that for a moment — for years McKinsey played both cop and robber.” As reported by The New York Times, April 13, 2022:9

“Since 2010, at least 22 McKinsey consultants have worked for both Purdue and the FDA, some at the same time, according to the committee’s 53-page report …

The firm provided no evidence to the committee that it had disclosed the potential conflicts of interest as required under federal contracting rules — an ‘apparent violation,’ the report said.

McKinsey also allowed employees advising Purdue to help shape materials that were intended for government officials and agencies, including a memo in 2018 prepared for Alex M. Azar II, then the incoming secretary of health and human Services under President Donald J. Trump.

References to the severity of the opioid crisis in a draft version of the memo, the documents show, were cut before it was sent to Mr. Azar.

‘Today’s report shows that at the same time the FDA was relying on McKinsey’s advice to ensure drug safety and protect American lives, the firm was also being paid by the very companies fueling the deadly opioid epidemic to help them avoid tougher regulation of these dangerous drugs,’ Representative Carolyn Maloney, the New York Democrat who chairs the committee, said in a statement 

[ … ]

A bipartisan group of lawmakers last month introduced legislation10 aimed at preventing conflicts of interest in federal contracting, citing McKinsey’s experience with Purdue and the FDA.”

The FDA, in response, has stated that it “relies on its contractors to assess and report potential conflicts of interest,” The New York Times reports.11 In other words, it’s just pointing fingers and refusing to take responsibility for working with advisers that clearly could, and should, be suspected of having ulterior motives, based on their client base.

Isn’t it obvious that McKinsey, working to improve sales for its opioid-making clients, might give the FDA biased advise on behalf of those clients? Remarkably, in October 2021, the FDA wrote12 to senators claiming they had no idea McKinsey was even working for Purdue, and didn’t find out about it until media reported it in early 2021.

It seems beyond irrationally foolish that the press could find out about it, but not the FDA — somewhat like the head of the CDC, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, going on CNN and quoting Pfizer press releases as factual data.

McKinsey Advised FDA on Opioid Safety

The FDA hired McKinsey as an adviser in 2011. The company worked with the FDA office overseeing drug companies plans to monitor safety of risky products such as opioids, and internal documents show that, on multiple occasions, McKinsey promoted its FDA connections when pitching services to its pharmaceutical clients.13

For example, in a 2009 sales pitch, McKinsey wrote that it provided direct support to regulators, “and as such have developed insights into the perspectives of the regulators themselves.”14

In a 2014 email to Purdue’s chief executive, McKinsey consultant Rob Rosiello wrote, “We serve the broadest range of stakeholders that matter for Purdue. One client we can disclose is the FDA, who we have supported for over five years.”15

Evidence also suggests McKinsey took “steps to limit material that could be subpoenaed” once Purdue was sued, The New York Times reports.16 In one instance, printed hardcopies of slide decks were sent to Purdue instead of being emailed because they knew Purdue staff would be deposed and didn’t want their email correspondence to “get sucked into it.”

Did McKinsey Influence FDA Commissioner?

The Interim Majority Staff report17 by the Committee on Oversight and Reform, titled “The Firm and the FDA: McKinsey & Company’s Conflicts of Interest at the Heart of the Opioid Epidemic,” published April 13, 2022, also includes emails in which McKinsey employees claim to have influenced an opioid safety speech by then-FDA commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb.

Gottlieb denies the accusation, but the fact that McKinsey was working so intimately with the FDA means they certainly would have been capable of such influence. Gottlieb also has financial ties to the opioid industry, having received $45,000 in speaker’s fees from companies that manufacture and distribute opioids.18

In 2012, Gottlieb also wrote a Wall Street Journal essay, attacking the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for pursuing the criminal activity of opioid distributors, saying it would burden patients, “including those with legitimate prescriptions who may be profiled at the pharmacy counter and turned away.”19

Intent to Harm

What we have here is a picture of gross conflicts of interest with an apparent intent to harm. Purdue Pharma was as crooked as they come, conducting sham studies and bribing doctors to prescribe its highly addictive opioid, while its consultant, McKinsey advised the FDA on the drug’s safety.

At the same time, Purdue also worked with the Publicis Groupe — the largest PR company in the world as of November 202120 — which funded the startup of NewsGuard, a “fact checking” group that rates websites on criteria of “credibility” and “transparency.” In April 2021, Publicis partnered with NewsGuard specifically “to fight the ‘infodemic’ of misinformation about COVID-19 and its vaccines.”21

NewsGuard’s health-related service, HealthGuard,22 is also partnered with the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) — a progressive U.K.-based cancel-culture leader23 with extensive ties to government and global think tanks that has labeled people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine as “threats to national security.”

At the beginning of May 2021, the Massachusetts attorney general filed a lawsuit24,25 against Publicis Health, accusing the Publicis subsidiary of helping Purdue create the deceptive marketing materials used to mislead doctors into prescribing OxyContin.26,27,28,29

Like Purdue, Publicis also cashed in on the opioid addiction it helped create by pitching its services to organizations working to end addiction. As reported by Forbes,30 the agency “won the account to work on drugfree.org after touting how it’s been ‘immersed in the evolving national opioid medication dialogue going on between pharma companies, the government and FDA, and the public via inside access as a trusted and informed consulting partner.’”

So, to summarize, Purdue knew the dangers of its drug, covered them up, hired FDA insiders to advise its sales strategy and influence the FDA, and is connected with a PR company that had the ability to suppress and censor negative news to manage its marketing. It’s hard to describe this scheme as anything but intentional mass murder.

The Spin Doctors

The reality may even be worse, and much larger, than that, seeing how Publicis is also a partner of the World Economic Forum (WEF),31 which is leading the call for a “reset” of the global economy and a complete overhaul of our way of life.32

As detailed in the featured video, Publicis’ fingerprints can be found throughout the net of censorship and misdirection that is now being cast across the digital landscape. As the No. 1 PR company in the world, Publicis has just the right credentials and influence to pull off a deception of this size.

It’s part of an enormous network that includes international drug companies, fact checkers and credibility raters, Google, Microsoft, public libraries, schools, the banking industry, the U.S. State Department and Department of Defense, the World Health Organization and Disney, just to name a few. As noted by investigative reporter David Marks in “How PR Giant Publicis Promotes Greed, Deception on Behalf of World’s Most Powerful”:33

“The essential skill of these expert spin doctors is their ability to fabricate a favorable interpretation of damaging information or activity or diminish the impact of the truth.

Through tried and true psychological ploys, repetition of false information or casting doubt on factual realities, ad agencies and PR firms target those who need to be influenced on behalf of their clients …

An examination of one of the largest entities neck-deep in managing these mass psychological operations reveals the depth of the dysfunction afflicting the planet. The vast activities of the Publicis Groupe demonstrate how the tentacles of greed, profit and privilege connect the catastrophic agendas of the most powerful enterprises on Earth …

Using sophisticated social psychology and incorporating the cutting edge of artificial intelligence, Publicis PR experts are masters of damage control, the manipulation of words and people, and of selling the unsellable. Publicis is organizing influential activities worldwide, overtly revealing its mission and priorities.

… [Its] website reveals who actually benefits from the company’s services: ‘The entire Publicis Groupe transformation was designed to put clients at the center of all we do. Their needs and objectives drive the solutions we provide in order to help them win and grow’ [ … ]

In considering the range of activities Publicis engages in, the dots are so close there is no need to connect them. The PR giant’s methodology is transparent.

Whether promoting opioids or pushing vaccines, rebranding status quo profiteering as a Great Reset, supporting cigarette sales, disguising the true nature of the fossil fuel industry, increasing soft drink consumption or covering for assassinations — Publicis has all the skills and facilities to create whatever fabrications are needed to sell products and influence how their wealthy collaborators are viewed.

The Publicis Groupe and its allies are at the hub of a worldwide insidious, destructive disinformation campaign, relying on the duplicitous ways of advertising and public relations in the loyal service of clients.”

A Plan to Drug the Useless Eaters?

As a WEF partner and global PR machine for some of the most powerful industries on the planet, it seems reasonable to assume Publicis is helping to coordinate the WEF’s Great Reset agenda. Sadly, that includes not only the management and control of the peoples of the earth, but also the elimination of “undesirables.”

In a 2015 interview (video above), Yuval Noah Harari, a history professor and adviser to WEF founder Klaus Schwab, discussed what Schwab refers to as The Fourth Industrial Revolution (i.e., transhumanism), noting that we’re now learning to “produce bodies and minds” (meaning augmented bodies, and cloud and artificial intelligence-connected minds) and that one of the greatest challenges we face will be what to do with all the people that have become obsolete in the process.

How will unaugmented people find meaning in life when they’re basically “useless, meaningless”? How will they spend their time when there’s no work, no opportunity to move up in some kind of profession? His guess is that the answer will be “a combination of drugs and computer games.”

This raises a disturbing question. Was the opioid crisis the result of an intentional plan — a conspiracy in the literal sense of the word — to hook the masses on an addictive drug? This is purely speculative, of course, but it surely fits in with The Great Reset agenda as a whole.

If people are addicted, the drug and medical industries make money (and they’re without doubt part of The Great Reset network), and if people die, well, that’s in accordance with The Great Reset plan too, as they insist there are too many “useless eaters” on the planet, and they either must be managed or eliminated.

Publicis Is Part of the Global Monopoly

In closing, it’s worth noting that Publicis is partially owned by the Vanguard Group,34 one of the two largest asset management firms in the world. Together with BlackRock, Vanguard has a hidden monopoly on global asset holdings and exerts control through their ownership of some 1,600 American companies.35

Combined, BlackRock and Vanguard own nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms.36 To learn more about how Vanguard and BlackRock own just about everything in the world, and have monopoly control over all industries, check out the 45-minute video above, “Monopoly — Follow the Money.”

In short, the idea that there is competition in the marketplace is a cleverly disguised illusion. In reality, everything is controlled by a small group of asset managers that win no matter what. The end goal is to own and control all the world’s assets, which includes people.

The WEF slogan “You’ll Own Nothing and Be Happy” really summarizes The Great Reset plan for mankind. They will own everything; you will own nothing, not even your own body, and you’ll be too drugged up and lost in a make-believe computer game world to realize you’re a slave. If they can somehow make a profit from your useless existence, they’ll let you live. If they can’t, you’ll be eliminated. That’s really what the plan comes down to.

The plan for global authoritarianism is advancing with each passing day, but all is not lost yet. By informing ourselves and sharing what we know with others, we can reach the critical mass needed to end their plan and take back control.

It’s going to require standing together, unified in favor of freedom and liberty. It’s going to require legal and legislative efforts to weed out the corruption and infiltration that has occurred throughout the corporate world and our governments. It’s going to require honest men and women to step into positions of power that they never wanted. It may take a lot of time and effort, but if we want our descendants to experience freedom, no price can be too great to pay.

Sources and References

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

WARNING: Biden quietly rolling out ‘digital vaccine passports’ — Big Brother will be watching you!

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Whenever government rolls out a system to track its citizens those citizens must we wary of its purpose. Of course we have IDs like: driver’s licenses, passports and voter IDs to be able to drive our cars, travel and legally vote.

While Democrats hate voter IDs but it appears that Biden, his administration and the Democrat party is launching vaccine passports, a.k.a. “SMART Health Cards” or Digital IDs.

No voter IDs but mandated SMART Health Cards? Since when does government have the right to track my personal healthcare actions?

What happened to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) signed into law by Bill Clinton?

The CDC website on the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) states:

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) is a federal law that required the creation of national standards to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosed without the patient’s consent or knowledge. The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued the HIPAA Privacy Rule to implement the requirements of HIPAA. The HIPAA Security Rule protects a subset of information covered by the Privacy Rule.

Related links on HIPPA:

Women’s Rights Without Frontiers in an email wrote:

As people are breathing a sigh of relief at the easing up of vaccine and mask mandates, the vaccine passports – called “SMART Health Cards” or Digital IDs — are being  quietly rolled out across our nation and internationally.  Especially when combined with a cashless society, these can be used to usher in a system similar to China’s “Social Credit Score [SoCS],” placing us under surveillance and taking away our freedoms.

Watch this 12-minute video titled “Securing America TV interviews Reggie Littlejohn on the ‘Digital Gulag'”, which contains a strong warning about vaccine passports.  Women’s Rights Without Frontiers President Reggie Littlejohn warns, “We cannot be lulled into complacency during this critical time!”

WATCH: Social Credit System Coming To China, With Citizens Scored On Behavior – MSNBC, May 11, 2019.

The Mercator Institute for China Studies (MERICS) in a Feb 11, 2022 article titled “China’s social credit score – untangling myth from reality” wrote this about China’s Social Credit Score pogram.

“What if every action that you took in your life was recorded in a score like it was a video game?” … “If your score drops to 950, you will be subject to re-education.” … “It is the beginning of slavery, complete control, and the disappearance of all freedoms … In China, they call it social credit.” These are just some of the statements made in parliamentary debates in Europe and online commentaries about China’s Social Credit System.

[ … ]

The SoCS, which first emerged in China in the early 2000s, was inspired by credit scoring practices elsewhere in the world, such as FICO in the United States and Schufa in Germany. In the main blueprints for the system there was no reference to large-scale scoring of individuals. It did, however, spawn tangentially-related initiatives like Alibaba’s Sesame Credit, but this was only indirectly related to the SoCS and, in any case, the People’s Bank of China eventually denied the company a credit license. Only in late 2016 did the State Council – China’s top governmental body – formally refer to the idea that it would “explore the establishment of a personal integrity score management system”.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Mathematician: Governments Manipulated COVID Data To Panic The Masses & Create “Crisis” –  

RELATED TWEET:

Dr. Scott W. Atlas: An American Hero

/in , , , , , /by

“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” –George Orwell

They say crises bring out the best and the worst in people. They also often inspire a few gallant men and women to rise to the occasion at great cost to themselves—whether that involves risking their livelihoods, reputations, or even their lives—to fight for the rest of us.

Dr. Scott Atlas, Senior Fellow in Health Policy at Stanford’s highly acclaimed Hoover Institute, former professor and Chief of Neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center,  Founding Fellow of Hillsdale College’s Academy for Science and Freedom in Washington, D.C., is one such hero, as he sounded the alarm over the nation’s disastrous lockdown/shutdown policies to fight a microbe.

When President Trump got wind of Atlas’ scientific and rational approach to keeping the vulnerable safe while sending everyone else back to school or work, he invited the doctor to come to the White House to enlighten the Task Force and the public as to how to proceed for the good of all.

Predictably, Atlas was subsequently roundly condemned in our national Pravda media, and perhaps even more disgracefully, by no fewer than ninety-eight of his colleagues at Stanford, who couldn’t wait to virtue signal by distancing themselves from one of their peers who dared to challenge the group think Covid narrative by speaking the truth.

Dr. Atlas Goes to Washington

Like the iconic Mr. Smith before him—played unforgettably by Jimmy Stewart in the classic film—Dr. Atlas was in for a rude awakening in the halls of government. His quickly became the lone voice crying in the wilderness, urging a reasonable, demonstrably scientifically valid, common sense way to save our quickly crumbling nation while lowering fatalities among our elderly—the most vulnerable to Covid.

One would think the Task Force members, none of whom was a health policy expert, would have welcomed his presence, advice and professional opinion. However,  they didn’t take kindly to someone correctly pointing out that the Emperor wasn’t wearing any clothes. After all, they’d been pursuing the same disastrous course of action for some six months, and though it had been a gargantuan failure on every level, insisted on keeping it going strong. How rude of this interloper to point this out! Atlas quickly became a barely tolerated pariah in the Task Force meetings.

In fact, upon Dr. Atlas joining the Task Force for the first time, Dr. Smirx, I mean Birx, asked him point blank how long he’d be attending their meetings. And later, Dr. Faustus told CNN that everyone on the Task Force was in agreement, except for one “outlier.” That would be the one telling the truth.

In his riveting account of his time in Washington, A Plague On Our House, Atlas chronicles how the members of the Coronavirus Task Force and assorted team players conspired to neuter him and his valiant attempts to provide the American people with the truth and thus to end the insanity and destruction of the lockdowns, and to open schools and colleges again.

Time and again, the Task Force members and associated Deep Staters closed ranks and drowned out Dr. Atlas’ message with their loud chorus of soundbite inanities to preserve the narrative of the Plandemic psy-op:

“Lockdowns work!” “You’re on the fringe!” “Masks work!” “Don’t rock the boat!” “They don’t even know they’re sick!” (That gem from Dr. La Scarf ). “We need more testing!” “Cases are rising!” “Don’t rock the boat!” “What if we’re not sure?” (Dr. Fraudster) “Schools are at risk!” “Super-spreader events!” “Slow the spread!” “Don’t rock the boat!”

INTENTIONALLY SINKING THE SHIP OF STATE

Dr. Atlas recounts being repeatedly stunned by the absence of logic, science and data at every meeting of these supposed public health “experts” who also seemed impervious to facts that disproved their cherished narrative.

What he may not have realized at the time is that, contrary to appearances, these people are not just stupid—they’re evil.  They knew what they were doing was wrong. They were taking orders, following a plan: the globalist cabal’s plan to weaken and gut America by decimating the middle class, disrupting nearly every sector of our society, and enabling an enormous wealth transfer from We the People and our beloved neighborhood Mom-and-Pop businesses, to the vast corporate pockets of Jeff Bezos’ Amazon and the Big Box stores, among other colluding profiteers, not to mention Big Pharma’s deadly boondoggle waiting in the wings.

Tragically, one can also readily imagine a cohort of Trump’s trusted inner circle after November 4th, many of the same people, urging the President to step down, though he knew he’d won the election, and singing a similar refrain to the tune of “Think of the optics!” and “Don’t rock the boat!”

ATLAS TRUMPS FAUCI

For a brief and glorious moment, Scott Atlas triumphed over the deadly duo, Dr. Fraudster and Dr. Smirx.

Largely due to Atlas pointing out the flaws with testing low-risk populations and the many issues with PCR tests, Drs. Giroir (Testing Czar) and Redfield (CDC Dirctor) agreed that the CDC testing guidelines should be revised.  Redfield circulated his revised draft among the Task Force members, including Dr. Atlas, so they could add their own edits. The resultant sea change in CDC guidelines restored the testing decision to the individual and his/her physician.  Testing would increase for nursing homes, and decrease for he general population. Bravo!

Only one problem.

The American Propaganda Machine, aka mainstream media, pundits, talking heads, etc. pushed back hard.  Outrage echoed across all platforms. Governor Newsom of California, never one to miss an opportunity to be on the wrong side of any major issue, declared: “I don’t agree with the CDC guidance period, full stop, and it’s not the policy in the state of California.”

Why was the Woke Left suddenly abandoning their idolized CDC? They screamed there must have been “top-down” (as in Trumpian) pressure on the agency to change the rules! After all, the new ones directly interfered with the “contact tracing” surveillance program and continuing fearmongering so central to the Plandemic agenda.

After two weeks of media meltdowns—not to mention a whopper by Dr. FauxChi, who claimed he was in the hospital undergoing surgery when the changes were made—Redfield quietly removed all the revisions to the CDC guidelines, which fell predictably back into the corrupt, destructive status quo. No wonder Dr. Atlas used the term Kafkaesque to describe his D.C. experience.

The brouhaha over this short-lived victory for common sense underscores that it was never about “the science” or the CDC—it was always about the larger agenda: the takedown of America.

DEATH BY BUREAUCRACY

What does it take to destroy a presidency? To destroy a country?

In our case, it may have only taken a crabby, scarf-clad killjoy named Birx flying from state to state to spread bad tidings—partially of her own making—to convince mainly Dem Governors to wreck their states. After all, there was a virus on the loose! So let’s undo Trump’s economic miracle, shut down the small businesses that are the engine of American prosperity and the heart of their communities, close the schools to further dumb down and traumatize our kids, and pretend our hospitals are overflowing in order to frighten people to death. Then force people to cover their mouths and noses with toxic synthetic masks from Communist China, so we can’t see each other’s faces, can’t relate normally, and have to breathe in our own ‘exhaust’ air, while dramatically curtailing the amount of oxygen we get with every breath.

Brilliant! But only if you wanted to make people sick, scared, and bankrupt—or at least poorer—and to destroy their country.

THE FAUCH AND THE GROUCH

For millions of Americans, myself included, Dr. FauxChi quickly became the face of the “Pandemic”—that is, of the overweening and catastrophic governmental response to the 2020 flu. Granted he had a knack for depressing an entire nation with just a sentence or two as he played his infamous role of the Emperor of Covid.

But one of the shocks I got from reading Scott Atlas’ eye-popping first-person account of the sausage-making apparatus of the Covidian Huddle and Task Force, was that Dr. Deborah Birx, aka Scarf Lady, really ran the show! In fact, she absolutely controlled the Task Force and nearly all the messaging that eventually reached the public.

Astonishingly, the entire Task Force along with nearly everyone involved in the Trump Administration’s Covid response lived in mortal fear of upsetting the notoriously thin-skinned, ill-tempered Birx.

But by October, as the political winds began blowing favorably for Trump’s reelection, Seema Verma, head of CMS/Medicare, told Scott, “… we need to get rid of Birx. She is a disaster! She keeps saying the same things over and over; she’s incredibly insecure; she doesn’t understand what’s going on. We need to eliminate her moving forward.” (A Plague Upon Our House, p. 237). This after months of Birx nixing everything Scott had recommended.

Remember when La Birx, after insisting that we give up Thanksgiving and just twiddle our thumbs under virtual house arrest rather than getting together with our families, actually flew home to spend Thanksgiving with hers? Seems the Newsom, Pelosi, Birx types understand full well that the rules they make are for us peons—not for themselves.

Dr. Deborah Birx traveled with family out of state over Thanksgiving weekend — disregarding her own advice to stay home and not gather during the holidays… Birx — who has a home in Washington, DC, and another in Potomac, Maryland — defended the trip, saying she needed to take care of winterizing the property before a potential sale.

“I did not go to Delaware for the purpose of celebrating Thanksgiving,” Birx said in a statement.

Nice try, Dr. Scarf.

Interestingly, once Birx tasted a morsel of well-deserved public fury, she headed for the door, suddenly announcing her retirement. Poor thing—she said the criticism was “very difficult on my family.”

Um, Deborah, how do you think your endless pushing for business and school closures has been on the families of countless numbers of the American people? I guess that’s been a bit more difficult than having your feelings hurt by being called out for rank hypocrisy, eh?

THE BUCK STOPS…NOWHERE

From my point of view, the most painful sentence in Dr. Atlas’ entire exposé of the inner workings of the Trump Administration’s Coronavirus Task Force turned out to be a quote by the President himself. During a tête-à-tête between the two men, Dr. Atlas explained the need for strategically focused testing, and Trump agreed but remained frustrated, adding, “You’ll have to convince my son-in-law of that.”

Hold on there! Who’s in charge? Who’s the President? Where does the buck stop?

This was the problem. As I see it, Trump had already lost the country to Establishment hack doctors, entrenched bureaucrats, and out-of-their-depth novices, including his own son-in-law who arguably should never have been brought into his fledgling administration.

In an American Thinker article, Dr. John Dale Dunn quotes Dr. Paul Elias Alexander’s personal account of his brief, tumultuous stint for the Trump Administration in the spring of 2020. He’d had the temerity to criticize the insanely unscientific and destructive policies of Fauci/Birx/Collins, who unceremoniously informed him:

‘Trump is powerless‘ they told me, he has zero power. Nothing he says matters to them in the deep state bureaucracy…As they told me, ‘he is only visiting, we run things’. . . .

This is largely what Dr. Atlas discovered as well. The Deep State—career bureaucrats on board with the takedown of America in favor of the elites’ One World Government agenda—along with other quislings and clueless neophytes, consistently undermined the President of the United States, and thus, the American people.

We owe a large debt of gratitude to men like Canadian Dr. Paul Alexander and our own Dr. Scott Atlas, for doing their utmost to rescue America from the stranglehold of the Faucian/Birxian/Redfieldian catastrophic Covid agenda. They paid a high price for their outspokenness. We can only imagine how much better off we’d be today had they, and others like them—the real scientists and adamant truth-tellers—prevailed.

© 2022 Cherie Zaslawsky – All Rights Reserved

VIDEO: There Never Was A Mask Mandate — Only Anti-God Capitulation

/in , , , , , , , /by

There is no “science” to any of these hyper-constitutional orders from government; there is only political, science fiction that is now permeating our Republic. In this edition of The Ledger Report – Post-Constitutional America, Graham Ledger details how to live by the commandment, Love Thy Neighbor, in the era of un-Godly and illegal mandates, like forcing people to muzzle their right to free speech on airplanes.

Please subscribe free to The Ledger Report by clicking here: www.GrahamLedger.com

©Graham Ledger. All rights reserved.

Elon Musk on Lockdowns: ‘Sweden Was Right’

/in , , , , , , , /by

Instead of rebuking Sweden and states such as South Dakota who exposed the failure of lockdowns, we should be thanking them.

When people think of polarizing countries, Sweden rarely leaps to mind. At least that was the case before 2020.

Sweden’s decision to take a “lighter touch” to the coronavirus pandemic—foregoing strict lockdowns and relying primarily on social responsibility to encourage social distancing—has made it a lightning rod for criticism.

Many commentators claimed Sweden was behaving recklessly and selfishly by refusing to enforce an economic lockdown like most other nations around the world.

Though its per capita death rate remained well below European neighbors such as the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Spain—each of which enforced strict lockdowns—Sweden became, as one CBS report claimed, “an example of how not to handle COVID-19.”

As I previously observed, however, the fact that Sweden was coming under fire had less to do with the results of its policies than the nature of its policies. There were far better “cautionary tale” examples than Sweden—such as Belgium, a nation with a similar population whose per capita death toll is 50 percent higher than Sweden’s.

Unlike Sweden, however, Belgium had a strict lockdown that, as the BBC reported back in May, was enforced with “drones in parks and fines for anyone breaking social distancing rules.” But nobody cared about Belgium because they had followed the lockdown script.

Months later, Sweden’s decision to avoid lockdowns only looks better. While much of Europe is experiencing a second wave of the virus, Sweden’s numbers are a stark contrast. Meanwhile, the World Health Organization and thousands of physicians and public health officials are now arguing against the use of lockdowns as a method of taming the virus.

The reason for this is obvious. While the harms of lockdowns are clear—trillions of dollars in economic losses, widespread mental health deterioration, and social decay—there is no compelling evidence that lockdowns reduced COVID-19 deaths or the spread of the virus.

The results of Sweden’s strategy become clearer with every passing week. And more people are beginning to notice.

“Sweden was right,” Tesla founder Elon Musk recently tweeted.

Musk, of course, has been suspicious of the efficacy of lockdowns for months.

In May, he took the bold step of restarting production of Tesla’s car plant in Fremont, California, in defiance of orders from government officials that the plant remain closed.

“Tesla is restarting production today against Alameda County rules,” Musk tweeted. “I will be on the line with everyone else. If anyone is arrested, I ask that it only be me.”

Musk’s act of civil disobedience paid off. Alameda County health officials caved, reversing the shutdown order and providing provisional approval for the plant to reopen.

The toll of COVID-19 has been severe. As of mid October, nearly 1.1 million people worldwide have died, according to Johns Hopkins University data, including 216,000 Americans.

Unlike previous pandemics, however, the human costs have been accompanied by a global recession and an economic collapse unprecedented in modern history. (This would seem to confirm Musk’s early assessment that the danger of panic posed perhaps a greater threat than the virus itself.)

As Harvard economist David M. Cutler and former World Bank chief economist Lawrence H. Summers noted in a new study, the toll of the Pandemic of 2020 is unlike anything the modern world has seen before.

“Output losses of this magnitude are immense. The lost output in the Great Recession was only one-quarter as large,” the authors write. “The economic loss is more than twice the total monetary outlay for all the wars the US has fought since September 11, 2001, including those in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.”

The economic results of the lockdown experiment are undeniable. Meanwhile, evidence is scant that they saved lives. In fact, new research suggests the lockdowns exacerbated the spread of the virus.

Unfortunately, many people still want to deny the data and the science. As one commentator recently put it in the Washington Examiner, the better Sweden’s numbers get, the angier people seem to become.

This is the danger of allowing a virus to become politicized. It obscures reality. Many seem intent on defending lockdowns because they were designed to help people (or perhaps because President Trump has resisted them), but such thinking should be avoided.

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results,” the Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman famously observed.

Instead of rebuking Sweden and states such as South Dakota who exposed the failure of lockdowns, we should be thanking them.

Without them, we may never have learned a truth that is becoming more obvious every day: the lockdowns failed.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

Sweden Now Has a Lower COVID-19 Death Rate Than the US. Here’s Why It Matters

Why Sweden Succeeded in “Flattening the Curve” and New York Failed

Sweden’s Actual COVID-19 Results Compared to What Modelers Predicted in April

BBC: Sweden’s Economy Is Doing Way Better Than the Rest of the EU During the COVID-19 Pandemic

5 Charts That Show Sweden’s Strategy Worked. The Lockdowns Failed

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Flow of Fentanyl into American Communities Quadruples Under Biden, Deaths Skyrocket

/in , , , , , , , /by

Awful. The Biden Administration has opened up America’s Southern boarder to change the electorate of the United States. This is the result. And you ain’t seen nothing yet. Just wait until Title 42 is repealed next month.

If the Democrat regime cared half as much about our young as they do about Ukraine’s borders, they would halt the mass importation of drugs and human trafficking at the US/Mexico border.

“Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that more than 100,000 Americans died from drug overdoses in the prior 12 months. Nearly two-thirds of those deaths were linked to fentanyl.”

Flow of Fentanyl into American Communities Quadruples Under Biden

By Breitbart, April 20, 2022

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, California — Four times as much fentanyl is flowing across the United States-Mexico border under President Joe Biden compared to two years prior when former President Trump was in office.

During the launch of Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Ken Calvert’s (R-CA) congressional caucus dedicated to the fentanyl crisis, U.S. Border Patrol Agent Mark Dunbar of the Murrieta Station in southern California noted that the level of fentanyl seizures has skyrocketed in the last year.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

VIDEO: Recording Of AstraZeneca CEO Saying How ‘Millions Of People’ Should Avoid COVID Shots

/in , , , , , , /by

The largest failed medical experiment in human history. Where are the indictments? Jail terms?

Project Veritas Drops Recording Of AstraZeneca CEO Saying How ‘Millions Of People’ Should Avoid COVID Shots [VIDEO]

So-called conspiracy theorists were right again…

By Gregory Hoyt, Red Voice Media, April 20, 2022

On April 19th, Project Veritas released a recording of the CEO of AstraZeneca claiming back in December of 2020 that certain individuals who are immunocompromised – which he said could be in the “millions” – should avoid getting the COVID shots.

A source from within AstraZeneca provided Project Veritas with the December 2020 recording where company CEO Pascal Soriot was discussing how the COVID shots could adversely impact the immunocompromised population.

“If you have an immune disease, lupus, or some other immune condition, you cannot – or multiple sclerosis, you can’t be vaccinated. So, there are millions of people in the world that will need a protection that cannot be coming from a vaccine. So, the long-acting antibody has enormous potential.”

Despite Soriot mentioning the aforementioned during a Zoom call in late 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) asserted that the AstraZeneca iteration of the COVID shots were safe for immunocompromised persons back in March of 2022……

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Vaxtermination: The Deliberate Culling Of The Human Population?

/in , , , , , , , /by

In an original production Wide Awake Media published the below documentary titled “Vaxtermination: The Deliberate Culling Of The Human Population?”

Wide Awake Media added this commentary:

Isn’t is odd that so many of the most vocal advocates of mass vaccination are also obsessed with drastically reducing the population of the planet? Hmm, I wonder if there’s a connection between the two?

Watch: Vaxtermination: The Deliberate Culling Of The Human Population?

On May 17th, 2021 in a column titled “On The Brink Of Collapse: America’s Declining Population Growth” Louis T. March reported:

Population decline is coming to America. Radical change is on the way.

Before the 1965 Immigration Act, the US was approaching zero population growth. The “land of the free and home of the brave,” as we call ourselves, has had below-replacement fertility since the early 1970s. We now see that fifty years of importing a new people merely delayed the inevitable. Immigration, which has slackened of late, is no longer a viable solution to either population decline or our mounting economic woes. Those of recent immigrant background have clambered aboard the below-replacement fertility bandwagon. Besides, there are not enough jobs to go around. Bottom line: Americans are having fewer children every year. In the 2020 year of Covid, twenty-five of fifty states had more deaths than births.

This is nothing new to demographers. But the New Normal has rocketed to public attention with a report titled Births: Provisional Data for 2020 from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), a part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The report has once and for all discredited a smug commentariat’s early predictions that the Covid-19 lockdown would lead to a baby boom. In fact, it has been just the opposite. Births were down significantly in December 2020, nine months after the lockdowns began. There is no doubt about it – the virus, the lockdown and its resulting economic shock caused millions of couples to delay having children.

From 2019 to 2020, the number of US births decreased 4%, from 3.75 million to 3.6 million. For the past six years (2015-2020) births have declined an average of 2% per year.

No ethnic or racial group was spared. In the same 2019-2020 period, the number of births declined among all: 8% for Asian-Americans, 6% for American Indian/Alaskan Natives, 4% for non-Hispanic Whites, 4% for non-Hispanic Blacks, 3% for Hispanics, and 2% for Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders.

The corresponding decline in general fertility rates among these groups was 9% for Asian-Americans; 7% for American Indian/Alaska Natives; 4% for non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Blacks, and Hispanics; and 3% for Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders.

There was a precipitous decline (8%) in the teenage birthrate (ages 15-19). Births to teenagers have been falling since 1991 and have declined 80% in the last 20 years. The government has long considered teen pregnancy a public health issue, as teenage births are usually out of wedlock, with subpar prenatal care and dim prospects for a stable family to rear children.

Most of these teenagers are scarcely getting by, with low skills and limited incomes, so this particular trend is not due to any improved economic status. Surveys show that today’s teens are less sexually active than their predecessors, have easy access to contraception and abortion, are ceaselessly tethered to their digital devices, vulnerable to a toxic popular culture centered on self-gratification and crushing peer pressure, while bedeviled by drug abuse, pornography, and a host of other distractions. Things have changed a bit since yours truly came of age!

In 2010, the average age of females at the time of the birth of their first child was 23. In 2020 it was 27.

In that 10-year span, there was a 6% birthrate decline for ages 20-24 and a 4% decline for ages 25-29. These are record lows. The 30-34 demographic declined 4%; ages 35-39, 2%; and ages 40-44, 2%. The birthrate for those aged 45-49 remained the same. As couples delay having children, the 45-49 window is where the biological clock runs out.

University of New Hampshire demographer Kenneth Johnson has stated the obvious, saying: “The [US] birthrate is the lowest it’s ever been.”

Since the 2008 financial crisis, the overall US birth rate has fallen almost 20%. Yes, the population continues to grow, though in the last half-decade growth is at the slowest rate since the Census began in 1790. As the baby boom generation passes from the scene, there will be successively smaller generations to replace them. Slow growth will yield to no growth, then negative growth.

So America is ageing. Its population will start to decrease. While the elderly do not yet outnumber the young, we are ineluctably headed for that inverted demographic pyramid. Every day there are more elderly to take care of and fewer workers to support them.

Something’s got to give. The ageing of America is upon us just when decades of fiscal profligacy are coming home to roost. The US debt-to-GDP ratio is 127% and rising. In fiscal 2020 the US government collected $3.5 trillion in revenues, or $10,457 per person, while spending $6.6 trillion, or $19,962 per person. The US National Debt is $27.7 trillion and counting.

This fiscal madness is a grave threat to American family life. How? The US dollar is the world’s dominant reserve currency, so all countries hold dollars for trade. Reckless US spending inevitably weakens the dollar. Consequently there is a budding global dedollarisation movement.

Should that prevail and the dollar is replaced as the dominant reserve currency, dollar purchasing power will collapse. It’s called inflation. That, coupled with a shrinking workforce due to below-replacement fertility, will mean crunch time. An economic downturn? We ain’t seen nothing yet. The title of Pat Buchanan’s superb 2011 book Suicide of a Superpower comes to mind.

If you want to start a family, you should do so as soon as possible.

©Wide Awake Media. All rights reserved.

U.S. Army Doctor Reveals Medics Were Told Not to Report Adverse COVID Jab Reactions

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Todays blog comes from an article in LifeSiteNews.com. It seemed pretty important that you all realize the total disregard this administration has for our military. It disgusts me and I honor this U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who is an Oathkeeper. God bless him.

Here’s the Truth for Health Foundation video, about 1.5 hours long, with U.S. Army LTC/Dr. Peter Chambers’ story.

U.S. Army Doctor Reveals Medics Were Told Not to Report Adverse COVID Jab Reactions

A U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and combat physician has described how fellow medics in the Army were told not to enter records of COVID jab adverse reactions into official databases.

“They either look the other way or they just say, ‘Well, I can’t do that. It doesn’t exist’,” said Dr. Peter Chambers, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, Special Forces Green Beret, and combat physician.

Chambers made the comments as part of the Truth For Health Foundation’s ninth online conference, which saw the announcement of the Foundation’s new global reporting system for COVID jab injuries.

Dr. Chambers’ jab reactions

Discussing the armed forces COVID jab rollout along with Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, the Foundation’s president and CEO, Chambers shed light on his recent experience as a taskforce surgeon for Operation Lone Star, a border security mission of the Texas military at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Chambers, a veteran of 39 years and a Purple Heart recipient, received Moderna’s COVID jab in January 2021, unaware of the potential side effects. He now counts himself as an advocate for the “vaccine wounded” due to the adverse reactions he experienced afterwards.

He swiftly developed “brain fog” of a kind which he had not experienced even while suffering aftershock from rockets while on active duty, and experienced loss of eyesight.

Following an eventual MRI scan, after bouts of vertigo, dizziness, and nausea which caused him to crash a truck while returning from night patrol, Chambers was diagnosed with demyelination, a disease which affects the nerve tissue.

Army medics ‘told not to enter’ adverse events into database 

He recounted how he had seen “multiple soldiers” also suffering similar side effects from the injections, along with “six soldiers that have been in the ICU,” and one soldier who was forced to take a second jab despite having suffered micro-clotting after her first.

Dr. Chambers took down the details from these service personnel and entered them into the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). However, he revealed to Dr. Vliet that “surgeons at the military hospitals were not letting them in. They were told not to enter people into VAERS.”

“Doctors told me personally in the active duty system that worked at Fort Sam Houston, that they were not to enter people into the VAERS system,” he added.

Due to the COVID jabs’ collective nature of being experimental vaccines, Chambers noted how “we can’t even enter it [COVID jab injuries] into our own defense, medical, epidemiological database.”

“We can’t even interpret that as a true diagnosis,” he said. “So when you try to speak to other positions, they won’t. They either look the other way or they just say, ‘Well, I can’t do that. It doesn’t exist’.”

Told to ‘pack bags’ over attempt to give informed consent

As taskforce surgeon for Operation Lone Star, Chambers had to fill out informed consent forms, as per Army regulations, for soldiers taking the COVID shots. Chambers noted how he had to “reinforce or confirm” whether soldiers needed the shot, while at the same time, his knowledge of the dangers of the COVID jab was growing.

Of the 3,000 soldiers he briefed, only six took the injection.

Challenged by a senior medical officer over this, Chambers said he was “told that I was to pack my bags and leave the border.”

As LifeSite has reported, Dr. Chambers later testified at a March 10 federal court hearing in Tampa in the Navy SEAL 1 v. Austin case. Chambers said he had been pressured into getting soldiers vaccinated and presented as an exhibit an instruction on religious exemptions that read: “Soldiers will try. Soldiers will fail.”

Praise for new vaccine reporting system

Having faced stern resistance against entering COVID jab reports into VAERS, Dr. Chambers warmly welcomed Truth for Health Foundation’s new vaccine reporting system – the Citizens Vaccine Injury Reporting System (CVIRS)™. “If the system that we have now in the government that they provide for us doesn’t work, then we the people have to provide something, because we still have to treat people,” he said.

Doctors “can’t just quit,” he added. “Not everything is COVID related.”

Chambers was the first person to use and register his vaccine injury on the Foundation’s new system, which is designed to be user-friendly and able to be completed in under 20 minutes. “This system was perfectly created for that, and I am honored to be the first person,” he added.

Help support our brave doctors and medical experts who are putting their livelihoods at risk simply by speaking the truth about COVID-19 here.

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

The COVID ‘Side Effect’: Almost 1 in 3 Now Suffer Mental Health Crisis Driven by Public Health Policy Trauma

/in , , , , , , , , /by

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The United States is facing a mental health crisis, experts say, noting we’re in dire need of more mental health professionals
  • Nearly 1 in 3 — 27.3% — of American adults now struggle with depression and/or anxiety
  • This is the price society is paying for ill-conceived, irrational pandemic measures and nonstop fearmongering
  • To treat everyone, each of the 33,000 practicing psychiatrists in the U.S. would have to see approximately 3,000 patients a year — a patient load that simply isn’t feasible
  • Those of us who have not succumbed to irrational fear (or worked our way out of it) can act as a lifeline to others by sharing information that empowers rather than enforces fear, and by being role models in the way we live our lives

The United States is facing a mental health crisis, experts say, noting we’re in dire need of more mental health professionals. Christin Drake, clinical associate professor of psychiatry at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, writes:1

“Every day, people call my office looking for help: A loved one has not left their bed in a week. A father is experiencing panic symptoms while preparing his children for school. A young woman is using substances in a way that feels dangerous to her. These are not the worried well. They are people in crisis.

Their conditions are complex and acute, and require the expertise of a psychiatrist who can talk with them, assess possible medical causes for their problems, manage withdrawal, prescribe medications when needed, and connect with other providers … Before the pandemic, I could almost always help. I would be able to find time to meet someone for a consultation, or make a few calls to secure the right referral.

But now, my every available hour — even those that jut into my ability to meet my obligations to my family — is full. My colleagues tell me the same. They are starting work earlier, working later, contending with long waitlists and their own limits. All the while, patients in crisis are going without psychiatric help.”

Depression and Anxiety Are at All-Time Highs

According to the most recent Household Pulse Survey,2 conducted by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, 27.3% of American adults now struggle with depression and/or anxiety, and that’s in addition to the 40 million Americans who report substance use disorders3 and the 14 million who have more serious mental illnesses.4

“There are about 33,000 practicing psychiatrists in the U.S.5 By my back-of-the-napkin math, if all of us were treating only people with depression or anxiety, each of us would have to see more than 3,000 patients a year,” Drake notes.6

In short, there aren’t enough practicing psychiatrists to handle the burgeoning tsunami of mentally unwell Americans. There also aren’t enough residency positions available to significantly expand the profession any time soon.

The Price of Fearmongering

While Drake doesn’t go into the causes behind the mental health crisis, it’s fairly obvious that this is the price society is paying for our government’s ill-conceived and irrational pandemic measures and the nonstop fearmongering. NPR contributor Kat Lonsdorf describes the constant fear of kidney transplant patient Jullie Hoggan:7

“While the surgery was successful and Hoggan is now vaccinated and boosted, she is still severely immunocompromised and has to take significant safety measures.

‘I’m so nervous. Like, my heart rate is through the roof when I’m out for anything,’ she said. ‘And I wonder if I’m ever able to be out safely again and be normal and go out to a store. Am I going to be feeling that forever?’

Hoggan works from home, rarely leaves the house, and when she does, it’s incredibly stressful. Her husband and college-age daughter both wear masks at home and have to be extremely careful about who they see and what they do.

Hoggan’s pandemic experience carries no violence and there have been no explosions or assault, which is why she has a hard time calling it trauma. But Arthur Evans, CEO of the American Psychological Association (APA), says viewing the world as unsafe can be a symptom of trauma.”

A Nebulous and Hard-to-Define Trauma

As noted by Lonsdorf, trauma typically involves some kind of life-threatening event or something that leaves you feeling fearful and/or helpless. Many who have religiously followed mainstream news over the past two years have clearly been traumatized, feeling as though death is imminent and there’s no escape. The death-dealing blow — in the form of an invisible virus — could come from anyone, including loved ones. No one was “safe” to be around.

What’s more, the pandemic wasn’t an isolated incident that could be processed and recovered from. Roxane Cohen Silver, a psychologist with expertise in collective trauma, likens the pandemic to a “slow-moving disaster” that “escalated in intensity over time” — and to this day doesn’t have a clear endpoint.8

Not everyone agrees that what we’re seeing is the result of collective trauma, though. Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, author of “The Body Keeps the Score” — one of the most-sold books on Amazon during the pandemic — is hesitant to categorize the pandemic as a collective trauma.

He tells Lonsdorf,9 “We need to be very precise … because if we don’t know what we are treating, we may give the wrong treatment.” He believes we need “a new term, a new language” to accurately define our circumstances. “That’s really what I’m encouraging us to do — to really identify what is making us all feel like we’re barely hanging on,” he says.

Officials Are Unwilling to Let Go of the Fearmongering

Whatever we end up calling it, it’s clear that our government’s and media’s response to the pandemic has been a key causative factor behind this mental health crisis. It’s also notable that even though COVID-19 has become endemic in most parts of the world, causing few deaths, the pandemic has not officially been declared “over.”

In early March 2022, the World Health Organization said discussions about when and how to declare an end to the pandemic were underway, but that “we are not there yet.”10

Denmark, the Netherlands and the U.K. have functionally declared an end to their national emergencies by lifting all or most restrictions, but other countries, such as New Zealand and Hong Kong, are moving in the opposite direction, renewing lockdown orders amid fresh surges in COVID cases (i.e., positive PCR tests, which doesn’t mean people are dying or even getting seriously ill).11

Meanwhile in the U.S., April 13, 2022, the CDC extended for another 90 days the public health emergency that’s been in effect since the pandemic began. In tandem, President Biden extended the mask mandates for airplanes and public transportation until May 3.12

In alternative media circles, fear of the virus has been tempered by more clearheaded analyses of statistics and data, showing that the real-world risk is actually quite limited, and that there are highly effective early treatments available even if you do get infected.

My guess is that those who now, two years in, are still struggling with overwhelming feelings of fear and anxiety about the virus are the ones who for whatever reason weren’t exposed to these comforting data, or chose to dismiss them (which is what mainstream media told them to do).

And, if they persist in following the legacy media, there’s really no relief in sight for them. While many now accept COVID-19 as another version of, or addition to, the seasonal flu, and are going about their lives more or less as usual, the mainstream media are trying to pump up the fear level yet again with — you guessed it — another variant.13

This one is called “Xe.” It’s said to be a combination of two previous subvariants of Omicron and the most contagious form yet. “COVID-19 Could be Surging in the U.S. Right Now and We Might Not Even Know It,” a headline for Time magazine announced April 11, 2022, adding:14

“… as the country tries to move on from the pandemic, demand for lab-based testing has declined and federal funding priorities have shifted. The change has forced some testing centers to shutter while others have hiked up prices in response to the end of government-subsidized testing programs.

People are increasingly relying on at-home rapid tests if they decide to test at all. But those results are rarely reported, giving public health officials little insight into how widespread the virus truly is.”

Truth Is a Big Part of the Remedy

This fearmongering is again based on the lie that the PCR test can identify an active infection (it can’t), and the false idea that asymptomatic spread is a driver of infection (it’s not). Time magazine also promotes the false idea that the COVID shot is “extremely effective at preventing severe disease” and that Omicron causes milder symptoms only in “healthy, vaccinated people,” even though real-world data suggest otherwise on both accounts.

There’s no mention of the fact that the COVID shots may be responsible for more than 1.2 million injuries15 and are, by any metric, the most dangerous drugs ever to be released. There’s also no mention of the fact that most people are likely immune to Xe at this point, as it arose right on the heels of a major Omicron surge.

Even questions about remasking have popped up again. “Is It Time to Start Masking Again?” The Atlantic asked April 8, 2022.16 According to The Atlantic, in the face of new variants, we ought to prepare “by having good masks on hand — and being mentally ready to put them on again.”

It’s that kind of mental preparation to face death every day and the useless ritual of donning a mask that is driving people to the brink of their mental endurance. Masking was futile from the start, but that doesn’t stop the mainstream media — which gets its talking points from those trying to figure out how to shove The Great Reset down our collective throats — from pushing this worn-out and wholly unscientific narrative.

Totalitarianism Is Built Through Fear

Let’s face it, they need us to be fearful because, otherwise, they know we won’t comply with what’s coming next — digital identities, biosensors and emotional monitors, vaccine passports, the green new deal (which will virtually eliminate your ability to travel any significant distance), programmable central bank digital currencies (which will give the issuers complete control over your spending) and much more.

For The Great Reset and Fourth Industrial Revolution to come to pass, the great masses must be willing to give up their freedoms and submit to more invasive surveillance and control, and for that, their fear of imminent death must eclipse all other concerns. For a description of how large swathes of society can be made mentally ill, on purpose, see the After Skool production above.

The good news is about half the population (in my estimation) have worked their way through the propaganda and no longer fret unnecessarily. Around the U.S., people are standing up to tyrannical and irrational COVID measures, be it mask and vaccine mandates or inhumane COVID rules in the hospitals.

In Tennessee, for example, a new state law will force hospitals to allow end-of-life visitations for COVID patients, so that they won’t have to face death alone.17 As noted by Dr. Jason Martin, an ICU doctor who’s been on the frontlines since the beginning of the pandemic, “End-of-life care in an ICU with COVID is terrible,” and watching patients die all alone, separated from their families “is a life-changing experience.”

Be a Role Model

There are no simple answers to the mental health crisis facing us, but putting an end to unnecessary fearmongering, I think, is a task that needs to be shouldered by those who still chose to work in mainstream media. On an individual level, it may mean shutting off MSM news altogether.

Those of us who have not succumbed to irrational fear (or who have worked our way out of it) can also act as a lifeline to untold numbers of people by sharing information that empowers rather than enforces fear, and by being role models in the way we go about our lives.

Don’t wear a mask to appease people’s fears. Let people see you smile. Be friendly and optimistic when in public. You never know how seeing you enjoy life might benefit someone who feels the world has become an unsafe and scary place.

In the long term, we need additional solutions — we need more qualified psychiatrists and therapists, for example — but in the meantime, we must do what we can, on an individual level, to ease the collective pressure, and we can begin by simply demonstrating that a different reality is possible.

The collective has been squeezed, mangled and brought to the precipice by a few in power. Many have been broken down in this process. It’s now time for the rest of us to take the reins and steward our fellow humans back to reality, back to sanity, by being firm yet kind, principled, ethical, truthful, rational and optimistic.

Sources and References

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.