Tag Archive for: Big Pharma

Psychiatry and Big Pharma Exposed — A Corruption Beyond Measure

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

“Psychiatry is a science…and it has the tools and knowledge at its disposal to help us when our lives break down. This is the official story we hear, the one gaining airtime in the media, the ear of government policymakers, and widespread dissemination through celebrity chat shows and popular magazines. But what if the actual truth about psychiatry were not so sanguine or clear cut as we have all been led to believe? What if there is another more insidious story to be told, one that threatens all of our preconceptions? An alternative story certainly does exist—a deeper and far more maddening story.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

The public has been led to believe that the diagnosis of mental illness by psychiatrists, and the prescribing of psychiatric drugs, is a practice grounded in science. In this video, we explain why this is not the case. We look at the problems with the diagnostic methods of mainstream psychiatry and we explore how Big Pharma has infiltrated and corrupted the psychiatric industry.

In 1973, a groundbreaking experiment was organized by David Rosenhan of Stanford University. Seven academics checked themselves into different psychiatric hospitals across the United States. Each told the psychiatrist on duty that they were hearing a voice in their head that said the word “thud”. Other than this, they acted normally. All the academics were diagnosed with schizophrenia, admitted to mental hospitals, and given antipsychotic drugs. Most of the academics were held for weeks against their will, and a few for over two months. Confessing that they were subjects in a scientific experiment only solidified the psychiatrists’ conviction that they were insane. The only way the academics managed to be released was to agree they were mentally ill and pretend they were getting better.

Another study conducted in the 1970s presented the same patients to different American psychiatrists in different locations. It was discovered that two psychiatrists gave different diagnoses to the same patient almost half the time. Yet another experiment showed that psychiatrists in the United States and Russia were twice as likely to diagnose a patient as schizophrenic than psychiatrists in England and Europe. Regarding these three studies, James Davies writes that:

“…in the history of psychiatry, [these experiments] were considered game-changers. They plunged psychiatry into severe crisis in the 1970s by exposing that there was something terribly wrong with the diagnostic system. Psychiatrists were not only defining sane people as insane, but when two psychiatrists at any given time were faced with the same patient, they would assign different diagnoses nearly half the time…Psychiatry was making these errors because it possessed no objective way of testing whether a given person was mentally disordered, and if so, precisely what disorder he or she was suffering from. Without such objective tests, the diagnosis a psychiatrist would assign could be influenced by his subjective preferences, and as different psychiatrists were swayed by different subjective factors, it was understandable that they regularly disagreed about what diagnosis to give.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Leaders in the psychiatric industry recognized that these experiments exposed a deep problem at the heart of psychiatry, which required a solution. The solution devised was to completely revamp the manual used to diagnose mental disorders. This manual is called the DSM, or the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and as Herbert Pardes explains:

“If you don’t understand the history of the DSM, you cannot hope to understand modern psychiatry…the DSM contains every mental disorder with which you or I could be potentially diagnosed, and that’s its significance.”

Herbert Pardes, Quoted in James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

The second edition of the DSM, published in 1968, consisted of vague definitions of mental illness which left too much room for subjective interpretation. In the 1970s, psychiatrists put together a Taskforce to essentially tear up DSM-II and re-write a new manual – DSM-III. Allen Frances, Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Psychiatry at Duke University, explains how the release of DSM-III enormously impacted not just the psychiatric community but the public at large.

“DSM stands for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. Until 1980, DSMs were deservedly obscure little books that no one much cared about or read. Then DSM-III burst on the scene—a very fat book that quickly became a cultural icon, a perennial best seller, and the object of undue worship as the “bible” of psychiatry. Because it sets the crucial boundary between normality and mental illness, DSM has gained a huge societal significance and determines all sorts of important things that have an enormous impact on people’s lives—like who is considered well and who is sick [and] what treatment is offered…”

Allen Frances, Saving Normal

DSM-III was an overnight sensation. It quickly sold out and the American Psychiatric Association took 6 months to print enough copies to catch up with the demand. This so-called bible of psychiatry became the default manual which psychiatrists across the world used to diagnose mental disorders. With its release and remarkable success, it appeared as if the field of psychiatry had overcome its diagnostic problems. However, as James Davies writes:

“…even as the influence of the manual spread, the truth about its construction remained obscure. Most professionals using the manual simply did not know (and still do not know today) the extent to which biological evidence or solid research failed to guide the choices the taskforce made.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

One of the updates to DSM-III was the inclusion of a checklist of symptoms purported to define each mental disorder. For example, DSM-III lists major depressive disorder as consisting of nine symptoms, and it specifies that if a patient exhibits 5 of the symptoms for two weeks, then a positive diagnosis of the disorder can be made. An obvious question is why the threshold for depression was decided to be 5 symptoms for 2 weeks. In 2010, Daniel Carlat interviewed the psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, the leader of the Taskforce which created DSM-III, and asked him this very question.

“Carlat: How did you decide on five criteria as being your minimum threshold for depression? Spitzer: It was just a consensus. We would ask clinicians and researchers, “How many symptoms do you think patients ought to have before you would give them the diagnosis of depression,” and we came up with the arbitrary number of five. Carlat: But why did you choose five and not four? Or why didn’t you choose six? Spitzer: Because four just seemed like not enough. And six seemed like too much. [Spitzer smiled mischievously.]”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Commenting on Spitzer’s admission, James Davies writes:

“Wasn’t the whole point of Spitzer’s reform to make psychiatric diagnosis a little more scientifically rigorous? But what, you may ask, is rigorous about a committee drawing arbitrary lines between mental disorder and normality?”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Lest one think this absence of research and scientific evidence was an exception in the creation of DSM-III, a member of the DSM Taskforce, Renee Garfinkle, recounts an instance where a decision was being made as to whether to include a specific symptom in the checklist for a mental disorder.

“On one occasion, I was sitting in on a taskforce meeting and there was a discussion about whether a particular behavior should be classed as a symptom of a particular disorder. As the conversation went on, to my great astonishment one taskforce member suddenly piped up, ‘Oh no, no, we can’t include that behavior as a symptom, because I do that!’ And so it was decided that that behavior would not be included because, presumably, if someone on the taskforce does it, it must be perfectly normal.”

Renee Garfinkle, Quoted in Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

In addition to adding a checklist of symptoms for each mental disorder, 83 new mental disorders were added to DSM-III. In an interview with Robert Spitzer, James Davies asked Spitzer about these new inclusions:

“So presumably, these disorders had been discovered in a biological sense? That’s why they were included, right?”, asked Davies. “‘No, not at all,” Spitzer said matter-of-factly….“No biological markers [for mental disorders] have been identified…Psychiatry is unable to depend on biological markers to justify including disorders in the DSM. So we look for other things…We have other procedures.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

One of these “other” procedures involved sending out questionnaires to select members of the American Psychiatric Association. The questionnaire asked the psychiatrists whether they thought a particular mental disorder should be included in DSM-III. If enough responded yes, the disorder would be presented to the Taskforce, who would then debate or vote about whether to add the disorder to the new manual. Donald Klein, a member of Spitzer’s Taskforce, explained that:

“…we had very little in the way of data, so we were forced to rely on clinical consensus, which admittedly is a very poor way to do things…There would be about twelve people sitting down at the table. And some would agree with the inclusion [of a specific mental disorder], and the others would continue arguing. If people were still divided, the matter would be eventually decided by a vote.”

Donald Klein, Quoted in Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Needless to say, consensus does not constitute scientific proof. There are countless examples where the consensus opinion of a group or experts proved to be dubious or wrong. Or as James Davies writes:

“If a group of respected theologians all agree that God exists, this does not prove that God exists. All it proves is that these theologians believe it. So in what sense is psychiatric agreement different? Why, when a committee of psychiatrists agree that a collection of behaviors and feelings point to the existence of a mental disorder, should the rest of us accept they’ve got it right?”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

In 2012, James Davies interviewed the Harvard psychologist Paula Caplan, who was a consultant to two DSM committees, regarding her thoughts on the methods that gave rise to DSM-III.

“It was so methodologically flawed, that it would fail an undergraduate examination. In fact, it was so full of basic errors, that I actually decided to use it on an undergraduate exam in which I asked students to point out every conceivable methodological error, because it had so many…All Spitzer’s research proves is that a group of psychiatrists working in the same institution gave the same label—rightly or wrongly—to a given set of behaviors.”

Paula Caplan, Quoted in Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

In his book Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm than Good, James Davies explains how the general public and the psychiatric community at large has been fooled into thinking the DSM is a scientific manual.

“[People] do not know that the definitions of the disorders contrived, the validity of the disorders included, and the symptom thresholds people must meet to receive the diagnosis were not decided by serious scientific evidence but were the product of committee decisions…In short, most people do not know that the fundamental changes Spitzer brought to global psychiatry only required the consensus of an extremely small group of people.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

To make matters worse, many psychiatrists who have been members of DSM taskforces and committees have, and continue to, receive financial payoffs from pharmaceutical companies. This is concerning as pharmaceutical companies, driven by the profit motive, have an incentive to get as many people on psychiatric drugs as possible. If they can influence those who write the diagnostic guides, they can expand the market for their drugs through overly broad classifications of what constitutes mental illness. A study from the University of Massachusetts discovered that of the 170 panel members of DSM-IV, 56% received money directly from pharmaceutical companies. With respect to psychiatrists who took part in DSM committee meetings to discuss mental disorders for which psychiatric drugs are the default treatment, 88 percent had financial ties to drug companies.

“Today it is very difficult to find somebody or a large number of people who have not had some pharmaceutical support.”

Robert Spitzer, Quoted in Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

The renowned psychiatrist Loren Mosher was so appalled by the financial chains that bind psychiatrists to pharmaceutical companies, that at the turn of the century he resigned from the American Psychiatric Association, claiming that “psychiatry has been almost completely bought out by the drug companies.” In his resignation letter he wrote:

“After nearly three decades as a member it is with a mixture of pleasure and disappointment that I submit this letter of resignation from the American Psychiatric Association. The major reason for this action is my belief that I am actually resigning from the American Psychopharmacological Association. Luckily, the organization’s true identity requires no change in the acronym…”

Loren Mosher, Quoted in Anatomy of an Epidemic

Psychiatrists’ financial ties to drug companies can account for what is called the medicalization of everyday life, which James Davies defines as “the process by which more and more of our human characteristics are seen as needing medical explanation and treatment.” Without scientific justification, for the last 70 years psychiatrists have continued to expand the number of mental disorders included in the DSM. In the 1950s, the first edition of the DSM listed 106 mental disorders. The latest edition, DSM-V, lists over 450 mental disorders. One hundred years ago, one in a thousand people were diagnosed as mentally ill. In the 1950s, this number grew to one in a hundred. Today, it is reported that approximately one in four people suffer from at least one of the many DSM mental disorders in a given year.

Social factors, such as the compulsive use of smartphones and social media and the decline of communal forms of social support, are undoubtedly contributing to a rise in mental health problems. However, in medicalizing normal human experiences and emotions, such as fear, anxiety, sadness, or depression, psychiatry has created the illusion of a mental health epidemic that has turned tens of millions of normal human beings into consumers of psychiatric drugs.

“…psychiatry has not only expanded its jurisdiction over more of us (one in four of us apparently now suffers from a mental disorder) but has also, by inflating the number of mental disorders, created a huge market for psychiatric treatments.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

In a 2007 BBC documentary, Adam Curtis interviewed the leader of the DSM-III taskforce, Robert Spitzer:

“So you have effectively medicalised much ordinary human sadness, fear, ordinary experiences?, asked Curtis. “Ì think we have to some extent,’ responded Spitzer. `How serious a problem it is, is not known. I don’t know if it is 20 per cent, 30 per cent. I don’t know. But that is a considerable amount if it is 20 or 30 per cent”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

The psychiatrist Allen Frances, the leader of the taskforce that created DSM-IV, also acknowledged that through the DSM psychiatrists are medicalizing normal human experiences and promoting the mass-drugging of modern citizens.

“…the situation I think is only going to get worse. DSM-5 is proposing changes that will dramatically expand the realm of psychiatry and narrow the realm of normality—resulting in the conversion of millions more patients, millions more people from currently being without mental disorders to being psychiatrically sick. What concerns me about this reckless expansion of the diagnostic boundaries, is that it will have many unintended consequences which will be very harmful. The ones I am most particularly concerned about are those that will lead to the excessive use of medication…

Allen Frances, Quoted in Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Or as Frances continues:

“Seven percent of Americans are now addicted to a legal psychotropic drug.23 Prescription drug abuse has become a bigger problem than illicit drug abuse. If there is a conceivable way to sell a new diagnosis so that people will incorrectly believe they have it, drug companies will have figured it out and will do it successfully—if sometimes illegally. ”

Allen Frances, Saving Normal

Surprisingly, it is not illegal for pharmaceutical companies to give money to psychiatrists, nor for psychiatrists to hide how much money they receive. As a few examples of how big a problem this is, the psychiatrist Frederick Goodwin, a former director of the National Institute of Mental Health, received $1.2 million from the drug company GlaxoSmithKline to promote mood stabilizers for bipolar disorder. In an interview with the New York Times, Goodwin explained that he was only “doing what every other expert in the field does.” Over a period of 4 years the psychiatrist Melissa Delbello, chair of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Cincinnati, received close to half a million dollars from AstroZeneca. Charles Nemeroff, the chair of psychiatry at Emory University, who was called the “Boss of Bosses” by a leading psychiatric journal, received $2.8 million in personal income from the drug company GlaxoSmithKline, as well as a grant of $3.9 million to study psychiatric drugs made by GlaxoSmithKline. In 2000, editors at the New England Journal of Medicine tried to find a psychiatrist to write an editorial on depression, and found “very few who did not have financial ties to drug companies that make antidepressants.” 

“Some of us, believe that the present system is approaching a high-class form of prostitution.”

E. Fuller Torrey, Quoted in Anatomy of an Epidemic by Robert Whitaker

And as Robert Whitaker explains:

“The pharmaceutical companies would not have been able to build a $40 billion market for psychiatric drugs without the help of psychiatrists…The public looks to doctors for information about illnesses and how best to treat them, and so it was the academic psychiatrists—paid by drug companies to serve as consultants, on advisory boards, and as speakers—who in essence acted as the salesmen for this enterprise.”

Robert Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic

To make matters more corrupt, pharmaceutical companies are by far the biggest funders of clinical trials on the efficacy and safety of psychiatric drugs. James Davies writes that “nearly all research into psychiatric drugs—antidepressants, neuroleptics, tranquilizers—is now pharmaceutically financed (e.g., nearly 90 percent of all clinical trials in the UK are conducted or commissioned by the [drug] industry).”  Those who receive funding from pharmaceutical companies, whether it be psychiatrists or researchers, must tailor their research, writing, and opinions to meet the demands of pharmaceutical companies, or else suffer financial and professional repercussions. As one example, the psychiatrist David Healy was offered the prestigious position of clinical director of the Mood and Anxiety Clinic at the University of Toronto. Before starting the position, he gave a lecture on depression and warned that antidepressants can provoke suicidal urges. Two months later, Healy received an email from the University of Toronto informing him that his offer had been revoked. Upon looking into the matter, Healy discovered that Eli Lilly, the makers of the antidepressant Prozac, fund 52 percent of the total budget of the Mood and Anxiety Disorder Clinic, and as Davies writes: “Healy began to suspect that the university pulled its offer because it feared that he, by critiquing Eli Lilly, would threaten an important funding source.” Or as Davies continues:

“…to palm from the pharmaceutical purse is to enter a Mephistophelian pact—one that gradually and often unconsciously erodes the recipient’s capacity to think and act objectively.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Big Pharma is also one of the top buyers of TV advertisements, accounting for approximately 10% of all TV ad purchases. Many of these direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ads entice people to take psychiatric drugs by communicating the debunk idea that mental illnesses are caused by chemical imbalances in the brain. One recent ad for Paxil stated that “Just as a cake recipe requires you to use flour, sugar, and baking powder in the right amounts, your brain needs a fine chemical balance in order to perform at its best.” In the United States, the FDA does not assess these pharmaceutical ads before they are released, which means that these lies reach millions of people before coming under any sort of scrutiny – if they ever do at all.

“The fact that the chemical imbalance theory has never been proven does not seem to matter to these corporations, which have made their public assertions as though they were based on scientifically established certainties.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

Along with spreading lies to the public, the advertisements of pharmaceutical companies also exert pressure on news networks not to speak negatively about pharmaceutical drugs, or the companies that make them, so as not to bite the hand that feeds them. Hence why it is so rare for mainstream media personalities to shine a light on the deep corruption of Big Pharma or even communicate simple skepticism regarding pharmaceutical companies or their products.

In the 1970s, news reports revealed that in the Soviet Union psychiatrists were diagnosing political dissidents as mentally ill, and forcibly giving them antipsychotics that caused brain damage and turned them into vegetables. An article in the New York Times argued that this practice was a form of “spiritual murder”. What is happening in the West may be more disturbing. Psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies have successfully medicalized normal human experiences, such as fear, anxiety, depression, and sadness, and therein promoted the mass drugging not of political dissidents, but of tens of millions of ordinary men, women, and children. Or as Robert Whitaker writes:

“…in 2011 alone a staggering 254 million prescriptions of antidepressants were dispensed to the American public. The vast majority of these pills were not prescribed to the stereotypically “mad” characters depicted in Hollywood movies. No, most of their recipients were just like you and me, average people simply trying to make their way. Perhaps you are one of them. Perhaps someone you love is one of them.”

Robert Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic

Ultimately, however, all the blame for this tragic problem cannot be placed on the lies spread by pharmaceutical companies, nor on the financial incentives psychiatrists receive from pharmaceutical companies. For a negative vision of suffering, which has infected the modern zeitgeist, is also contributing to the medicalization of everyday life and the mass drugging of modern citizens. This negative vision of suffering conveys the idea that all suffering is pathological and best dealt with by getting rid of it as swiftly as possible. In the final video of this series, we critique this vision and offer a positive vision in its place, so that we are better equipped to deal with the pains of life without considering ourselves mentally ill, engaging in unproductive behaviors, or taking psychiatric drugs that are at best ineffective and at worst dangerous to mental health. Or as James Davies writes:

“…the [negative] vision of suffering which now culturally dominates can explain why an increasing number of people have come to manage, understand and respond to their discontent in ways that are socially and individually disadvantageous…The growth of this [negative vision of suffering] is easily illustrated by figures that show how we are progressively managing our emotional troubles in contemporary life – not as potentially productive experiences to be engaged with and learnt from, but as harmful experiences to be removed with medication.”

James Davies, Cracked: Why Psychiatry is Doing More Harm Than Good

©2024 . All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Psychiatry & Big Pharma: Exposed — Dr. James Davies, Ph.D.

Please visit the Academy of Ideas substack.

Largest organization of OB-GYNs in America accepted $11 million from HHS to promote COVID-19 vaccines to PREGNANT WOMEN

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

Demons.

Largest organization of OB-GYNs in America accepted $11 million from HHS to promote COVID-19 vaccines to PREGNANT WOMEN

Largest organization of OB-GYNs in America accepted $11 million from HHS to promote COVID-19 vaccines to PREGNANT WOMEN

By Arsenio Toledo, CDC News, August 23, 2023:

Documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests reveal that the main professional organization of obstetricians and gynecologists (OB-GYNs) in the United States accepted over $11 million in taxpayer money to promote the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines and claim that they are safe for pregnant women and their unborn children.

This is according to fetal-maternal medicine specialist Dr. James Thorp, who conducted an investigation into the massive damage the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are doing to women, especially to those who are pregnant and their unborn children.

In an interview with COVID-19 vaccine expert and Big Pharma critic Dr. Naomi Wolf, Thorp laid out how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) created what he called a “covenant of death” with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) – the largest professional organization for OB-GYNs in the United States and the rest of the Americas – in exchange for $11 million.

“What’s in this covenant of death? … They took well over $11 million. They signed the covenant with death, and they’re not allowed to deviate one iota from the lethal narrative of HHS. If they do, they will be liable for paying back every single penny, which they’ve already pocketed,” said Thorp.

Thorp and Wolf noted that the contract uncovered by the FOIA requests provided for the return of the money to the HHS if ACOG did not adhere to the government’s “‘safe and effective’ for pregnant women and new moms script presented to them” by the federal government.

He added that ACOG is not the only professional medical association to have accepted money from the government. Other recipients of government funding in exchange for promoting the COVID-19 vaccines include the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.

“[These organizations], to this day, are the evil organizations that perpetrated this crime on the world,” said Thorp.

“Doctors who treat the most vulnerable population in the world – pregnant women and their unborn babies – have been and are coerced to lie by organizations that oversee these doctors, that were paid to lie,” remarked Wolf. “At least one primary goal, of all this madness and evil of the past three years, whatever brand you chose, was to ruin women’s menses and to damage human reproduction at a global level. Team Pfizer or Team Moderna? A distinction without a difference.” (Related: If your doctor told you to get “vaccinated” for COVID, they were BRIBED, evidence shows.)

$13 billion in funding redirected to “influencers” to promote COVID-19 vaccines

In addition to the approximately $11 million provided by the government to ACOG, Thorp noted that his FOIA investigations – launched with the help of his wife, attorney Maggie Thorp – revealed that $13 billion in taxpayer money went to fund “influencers” to promote the mRNA vaccines.

Most of this $13 billion went to a variety of individuals and organizations. Notable are the organizations like ACOG that focus on medicine for pregnant women, such as the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the main medical certification board for practicing obstetricians and gynecologists in the U.S. and Canada, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, an NGO.

According to Thorp, there are about 300 major organizations and influencers – including religious institutions like synagogues and churches – that accepted money from the HHS and the CDC in a “psyops campaign … to convince the United States and the entire world that this deadly shot was safe, effective and necessary in the most vulnerable population – pregnant women.”

Read full article.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

MSNBC Doctor Urges Nationwide Covid Booster for Anyone Older Than Six

NIH Email Reveals Dr. Fauci Lied About Not Funding Gain of Function Research in China

HARD EVIDENCE Confirms Covid Shot Killed The Unborn and Massively Injured Babies

After using COVID-19 victims to promote medical tyranny, the mainstream media callously disregards the vaccine injured.

Dr. Bryan Ardis says SNAKE VENOM PROTEINS in COVID-19 shots behind MISCARRIAGES – Brighteon.TV.

CHILD KILLERS: CDC data show over 118,000 U.S. children died suddenly after COVID jab rollout.

DATA ANALYSIS: Increase in miscarriages and stillbirths directly linked to COVID-19 vaccines.

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

Musk’s New Blue Check System Costs Eli Lilly Billions After Fake ‘Free Insulin’ Tweet

/in , , , , , , , /by

Elon Musk’s new blue-check system for Twitter apparently cost at least one multinational corporation billions of dollars in value this week.

Eli Lilly, one of America’s foremost pharmaceutical brands, saw its stock price fall more than 2% Thursday after a fake tweet went viral earlier in the day promising “free insulin.” The account responsible for the fake tweet impersonated the official Eli Lilly account and had purchased a verification checkmark under Musk’s new “Twitter Blue” system.

The account, which used the username @EliLillyAndCo and the official Eli Lilly logo, tweeted Thursday afternoon, “We are excited to announce insulin is free now.” The tweet quickly gained hundreds of retweets and thousands of likes, precipitating the drop in stock value that cost the real company roughly $20 billion in market cap.

The blue check was removed from the account and its tweets were made private later Thursday, but the damage had been done. Eli Lilly issued a statement clarifying that insulin would not be free under its real twitter username, @LillyPad, and apologized for the misleading statement being disseminated.

Musk promised to begin charging $20 per month to users who were verified on Twitter after he purchased the platform last month, a plan that quickly evolved into charging $8 per month for “Twitter Blue,” which would give users the same blue check mark as those who are verified along with some other perks.

Within days of the service launching, misinformation began to run rampant across the platform as accounts impersonating celebrities and politicians now had blue checks to grant them a veneer of credibility. An account impersonating Lebron James requested a trade from the Los Angeles Lakers. Another pretending to be the Pittsburgh Steelers announced the death of starting quarterback Kenny Pickett. A fake George Bush and fake Tony Blair shared memories of “killing Iraqis.”

Twitter reportedly circulated an internal memo Friday claiming it is suspending the launch of Twitter Blue and actively discouraging people from signing up while it addresses “impersonation issues.”

AUTHOR

DYLAN HOUSMAN

Chief foreign affairs correspondent. Follow Dylan on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLR: Musk Tells Twitter Staff ‘Bankruptcy Isn’t Out Of The Question’ As Executives Jump Ship Over Privacy Concerns

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

VIDEO: FDA Exec Exposes Close Ties Between Agency and Big Pharma

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

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*

Project Veritas released Part Two of its video series on the FDA today, which features FDA Executive Officer, Christopher Cole, speaking about the inner workings of the agency — including the FDA’s conflicts of interest, overspending, and why it’s hard for those within the agency to speak out on such abuses.

Here are some of the highlights from today’s video:

  • FDA Executive Officer, Christopher Cole: “The drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies. So, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products.”
  • Cole on FDA fees: “Congress approved user fees for [the] FDA. Basically, we charge the industry millions of dollars in order to hire more drug reviewers and vaccine reviewers which will speed up the approval process. So, they [pharmaceutical companies] make more money.”
  • Cole: “They [FDA] tone down the impact of the user fees on their operations because they know they’re dependent on the drug companies, and the vaccine companies, and these other companies for their agency to operate.”
  • Cole on blowing the whistle: “There’s not an incentive to speak out in government, surprisingly. You would think there would be, but there’s not. It’s better just to just not say anything and just ignore it.”

You can watch the full video by HERE.

Cole’s LinkedIn page lists him as an Executive Officer within the agency’s Countermeasures Initiatives, which plays a critical role in ensuring that drugs, vaccines, and other measures to counter infectious diseases and viruses are safe. He made these revelations on a hidden camera to an undercover Project Veritas reporter.

A spokesperson for FDA issued a statement yesterday saying, “The person purportedly in the video does not work on vaccine matters and does not represent the views of the FDA.”

This statement appears to contradict a phone call released Wednesday afternoon by Project Veritas wherein Cole reiterated that he is “a manager in the office that helps oversee the approval of the COVID vaccines for emergency approval.”

Will the FDA clarify this situation? Only time will tell…

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas video report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Premeditated Genocide by the Medical Drug Cartel

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

“In a sense, bioterrorism phase one was rolled out. It was really all about keeping the population in fear and in isolation and preparing them to accept the vaccine, which appears to be phase two of a bioterrorism operation.” – Dr. Peter A. McCullough

“Dr. McCullough gives us a stark and clear summary: ‘Remdesivir has two problems. First, it doesn’t work. Second, it is toxic and it kills people.’” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

“One-third of teens and young adults reported worsening mental health during the pandemic. According to an Ohio State University study, suicide rates among children rose 50 percent. A study in August 11, 2021 by Brown University found that infants born during the quarantine were short, on average, 22 IQ points as measured by Baylor scale tests. Some 93,000 Americans died of overdoses in 2020—a 30 percent rise over 2019.” –  Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“This vaccine is directly killing individuals…It can damage you, no doubt about it.  The scoreboard is lit up as bright as it can be: death, hospitalization, cardiac and neurologic injuries, miscarriage, still birth, it can’t get worse.  I can’t think of any drug or any injection that is as dangerous as this group of vaccines, in particular, the Pfizer vaccine.” –  Dr. Peter A. McCullough

The killing fields of America are here.  We are at a crossroads.  Death by government and Big Pharma is staring us in the face.  This isn’t the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment by our US Health Department, this isn’t the cancer-causing polio vaccine injections of the 50s, or the plutonium experiments on babies and military in the 40s, all of which were evil unto themselves and totally unconstitutional.  This isn’t even the heinous abomination of millions upon millions of European Jews slaughtered in the Holocaust.  No, as evil as these past genocides were, COVID hospital protocols and multiple C-19 “vaccines” are a worldwide genocide proliferated by the medical drug cartel and their mafioso friends.

The determination to preserve medical freedom is in our hands…and the war is on against the mandated murderous jabs by government, Big Pharma and their stakeholders.  These pharmaceutical companies are bringing in billions with this evil inoculation, and now they’re on their 4th booster jab despite thousands of deaths and adverse effects. They’re targeting our infants and toddlers but the FDA has refused, for the time being, approval of these jabs for children six months to five years.

Canadian truckers who want the jab mandates stopped have been arrested and their trucks hauled away after the government cut off their food and fuel.  Trudeau’s totalitarian edicts have destroyed any semblance of freedom in Canada.  Without truckers, supplies will be even more limited, but the elitists will never starve.

Forced vaccines are not new.

History Repeats

Mandatory vaccination has happened before…with smallpox 135 years ago.  Here’s what a Midwest doctor told Steve Kirsch:

What is currently happening with the COVID mandates and protests is nearly identical to what happened 135 years ago with the smallpox vaccine campaigns, where the vaccination made smallpox epidemics worse, the vaccines killed a lot of people, the public refused them and governments responded by harsher and harsher mandatory vaccination laws.

Eventually one of the largest protests of the century broke out in 1885, vaccine mandates were scrapped in one area in favor of alternative management of smallpox, and this is what actually ended smallpox.

My belief is that this is a very important message to get out to the current protest movement and will do a lot of good if it does.

I wrote a 10-page concise but detailed and referenced summary of everything that happened which I want to be made available (but I do not want credit for).

The entire summary can be found here and I would greatly appreciate it if you could bring awareness to this issue.

The deadly mistakes of 135 years ago are evident today.  Interestingly enough, the smallpox vax was forced upon our military after 9/11 and it caused myocarditis.

Vax Injuries

Three respected immunologists, Dr. Luc Montagnier (who won the Nobel Prize in 2008 for his discovery of the HIV virus, and who recently passed away), Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, the most published immunologist in history, and Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, a top immunologist in the Netherlands, have all warned that when you mass vaccinate in the middle of an active outbreak, you cause variants to emerge.  American dissident physicians have stated the same.

Dr. Bhakdi comments, “There is a good possibility that whoever orchestrated this knows exactly what they’re doing, and they are doing it on purpose to maintain the new variants and the consequences, which is essentially a psyop to cause a global psychosis due to fear, lockdowns and face diapers.”

In this 17-minute video, Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi explains the irrefutable bodily damages from the jab.  People who died after having the vaccine, had family-requested autopsies and nothing was found until Dr. Arne Burkhardt performed more thorough autopsies.  Burkhardt is one of the most experienced pathologists in Europe.

In the organs of 90% these people Dr. Burkhardt found clear evidence of auto-immune attack by killer lymphocytes on the tissues, the main organs being the heart, the lungs and the liver.  His article, “Notes and recommendations for conducting post-mortem examination (autopsy) of persons deceased in connection with COVID vaccination,” is posted on Doctors for Covid Ethics. The data is so damning and proves these inoculations are killing the young and the old.

It is now known that auto-immune attack reactions, leading to self-destruction, are being triggered by these “vaccines.”  Dr. Bhakdi states, “What Arne Burkhardt found was that in 90% of the deceased, age 28 to 90, women and men, one to one, who would never have thought they’d die because of these ‘vaccines,’ the same pathological findings were found in all of them. When Dr. Burkhardt says killer lymphocytes have invaded the hearts and lungs, and sometimes other organs of these people, the question arises, ‘Why the hell do killer lymphocytes invade the organs?’  The only answer is that these organs are producing the targets that are seen by the killer lymphocytes, and that target is the viral protein.”

What is going to happen?  Bhakdi says, “Your lymphocytes and the cells responsible for immune control over your body are dying. They are responsible for controlling viruses and every other disease that attacks the body.

Because of the jabs, the immune system is dying. The result will be high incidences in various countries of tuberculosis where it is now dormant. Tumor cells are no longer under control causing increased numbers of cancers, as evidenced by pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole of Idaho, viruses, herpes, Epstein-Barr, Cytomegalovirus (CMV) which kills babies in the womb, toxoplasmosis, and a horrifying number of other illnesses.

Dr. Bhakdi tells us, “Clearly the ‘vaccines’ are not working – a fantastic business circumstance for Big Pharma to continue generating income with ‘boosters’ – but not so good for humanity.”

Two high school basketball players suddenly dropped dead on the court last week with heart problems.

Bill Gates, who is the principal investor in many of these COVID jabs, stipulated that their risk is so great that he would not provide them to people unless every government shielded him from lawsuits, just like they shield the pharmaceutical giants who made these mRNA jabs.

Pfizer announced that the COVID-19 “vaccine” it makes with BioNTech registered a staggering $36.8 billion of sales in 2021.

Meanwhile, Moderna’s CEO dumped his stock and deleted his twitter account.  The Moderna CEO’s strange moves came shortly after a former Blackrock executive began investigating the death statistics from insurance companies and funeral homes.

Deadly Hospital Protocols/Remdesivir

Registered nurse, Nicole Sirotek spoke out at Senator Ron Johnson’s hearing of “dissident” medical professionals who were speaking the truth about the injections and the hospital protocols for treatment of COVID.  Watch her eight-minute talk.

Ms. Sirotek states that she didn’t see a single patient die of COVID, she’s seen a substantial number of patients die of negligence and medical malfeasance. She was told by the staff that they were just following orders.  She stated that she saw the pharmaceutical companies rolling out remdesivir on the patients, when they had no right to treat them.  She said everyone saw that this FDA approved costly drug was killing the patients and they had less than a 25% survival rate if they received more than two doses at an extremely high cost, not to mention the destruction of their kidneys/liver.

So why in the world would the FDA approve a drug that must be monitored for kidney/liver failure? The FDA now approves the drug to treat “non-hospitalized patients.” The drug is administered through an IV, and patients must be closely monitored. But non-hospitalized?  Doctors have sounded the alarm for months, but their voices have fallen on deaf ears.

Remdesivir is first degree murder.  It is being used to kill us.

The antiviral drug is owned by Gilead Sciences and developed with investment from the federal government, that being NIAID and the CDC at a tune of $79 million. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation owns a $$6.5 million stake in Gilead.  It had languished for years with no apparent commercial use.  But remdesivir was a big win for Gilead when it was given to half the patients hospitalized with COVID.  Link  Anthony Fauci knew of remdesivir’s toxicity when he orchestrated its approval for COVID patients.

Dr. Fauci has persistently insisted on double-blind randomized placebo trials for medicines he dislikes (those that compete with his patented remedies) and airily fixed the NIAID study of remdesivir by changing the endpoints midstream to favor the drug.  He has never demanded randomized studies to confirm safety of the combined 69 vaccine doses currently on the childhood schedule.  Every one of these vaccines is regarded as so “unavoidably unsafe” in the words of the 1986 Vaccine Act (NCVIA) and the Supreme Court, that their manufacturers have demanded, and received, immunity from liability.  Page 35, The Real Anthony Fauci by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Nicole Sirotek tells of a 10-year-old she had to have flown out who had received the first jab the previous day and had myocardial infarction.  She says, “The doctors won’t believe it and use victim shaming claiming it’s anxiety or stress, but if they put down that it was a vaccine injury, the physician and corporation, the hospital or clinic actually won’t get reimbursed, so it is labeled as anxiety or neuropathy, or Guillain-Barre Syndrome.”

Hospitals receive payments for testing every patient for C-19, every diagnosis and every ‘COVID death,’ as well as any time they use remdesivir and mechanical ventilation. They don’t get a special bonus if you live, so is it any wonder patients still aren’t receiving appropriate care?

WHO has issued a conditional recommendation against the use of remdesivir in hospitalized patients, regardless of disease severity, as there is currently no evidence that remdesivir improves survival and other outcomes in these patients!

Dr. Paul Marik, chief of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School and former director of the ICU at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital, learned about his 14-day suspension when he arrived to work last November and found a letter on his desk.  Because he would not treat patients with remdesivir when he was at Sentara, but wanted to save their lives with alternative inexpensive repurposed drugs, he was suspended for two weeks.  Dr. Marik has testified that remdesivir increases the risk of death.  Sentara eliminated one of the finest physicians they had, a physician who actually developed a treatment for sepsis that saves 50-80% of patients.  Marik is the co-founder of Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, (flccc.net) which offers prevention and treatment protocols for COVID.

Negligence and Medical Malfeasance

Nicole also said that she had worked in other countries on the COVID virus, and she sees America’s healthcare as so deteriorated as to be like that of third world countries. She said she was getting reports from the organization she founded, America’s Frontline Nurses, saying that patients were not getting food or water.  “How come a patient hasn’t been fed in nine days who isn’t intubated and is telling that they would like to have food?!”  She said she’s had patients on vents who haven’t been bathed, fed, given water or turned to avoid bed sores.

“If you ask me, this isn’t a hospital, it’s a concentration camp. Nowhere in the United States do we isolate people for hundreds of hours at a time with no human contact.  It’s not even allowed in the prisons.  You cannot isolate prisoners beyond a certain period of time because it’s horrible for their mental health and it’s considered inhumane.  However, in these hospitals now, we’re allowed to isolate patients from their families for days, and you have to say goodbye to them over an iPhone.”

In this latest horrifying story, a father was forced to leave his teenage Down Syndrome daughter who was sick with C-19, after four days of being by her bedside.  The hospital actually threw him out.  The guard who walked him to his car told him to seek a higher authority.  They sent their other daughter in to be with her, but most shocking was that one of the physicians put a “Do Not Resuscitate” on his daughter’s chart and hours before she died, Grace received an assortment of drugs – including three doses of lorazepam and a dose of morphine.  The parents watched their daughter die via FaceTime while their other daughter screamed for the nurses.  They were outside the door and would not come into the room to save the teen they had just murdered with drugs that were used for palliative care, not for the Wuhan virus.

How can anyone call this anything but mass murder?!

Critical Against Government?  You’re a Domestic Terrorist

The Biden administration has designated free speech as a terrorist threat when it criticizes the federal government.  The Department of Homeland Security U.S. terrorism threat summary includes spreading ‘disinformation’ about not trusting government! 

It states,

(1) the proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions.

This bulletin is in effect until June 7, 2022.

Our dissident physicians, scientists and nurses, along with authors, journalists and American citizens are now considered domestic terrorists for freely speaking/writing our beliefs.

Conclusion

In 1860, Frederick Douglass commented, “Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist.”

Silence is not golden!  The medical drug cartel mafia are determined to quell the truth as well as the dissidents who utter it. It is essential that no voice of truth be stilled!

They must hear the cry of FREEDOM!

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Big Pharma Exposed, Scientists Speak Out About Vaccine Mandates

RELATED VIDEO: Medical Racism in the USA