Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 684
August 7, 2021
Doctors share THEIR OWN vaccine injury horror stories, revealing that vaccines are devastating the medical profession
Dr Eddy Betterman
Medscape has launched a new portal where doctors can share their own personal stories about vaccine adverse events. And already there are well over 1,000 entries, many of which contain horror stories about how chemical injections are destroying people’s lives.
One doctor expressed concerns about how low-risk, healthy adults are being pressured by the government and the media to get “vaccinated” for Covid-19. Children and even babies are also now being pressured as well.
Another linked to the Health Resources & Services Administration website, which contains information for people who have suffered vaccine injuries to apply for compensation through the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.
Entry after entry tells of how vaccines of all kinds, including the ones launched by Donald Trump under “Operation Warp Speed,” are damaging people’s bodies and in some cases killing them.
The medical establishment would rather us all believe that such incidents are “rare,” but the truth is that they are much more common than people think. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) only captures maybe one percent of all injuries and deaths caused by vaccines, which means the figures are much, much higher than what the government is reporting.
“I have a hunch that every time we give the COVID vaccine we delay natural herd immunity by another 6 months,” another physician wrote. “I would rather contract the virus and have natural immunity.”
“The Cleveland Clinic has come out with a case study indicating that titers over 200 lend adequate natural immunity. This begs the question: why do we do free testing and free vaccines but not free titers? Why is that?”
This same person went on to explain that if she was in charge as opposed to medical quacks like Tony Fauci, she would be putting everyone on a vitamin D supplement and telling them to drink a gallon of water every day and go outside for 15 minutes in the natural sunlight.
“I would start a titer draw campaign and focus on those numbers,” she added.
Hospitals are being overrun with vaccinated patients suffering cardiac eventsThis preventative approach is something that the American government, and really most governments, never endorse or promote. The Thai government did recently grant approval for the use of the green chiretta herb in treating Covid, but this is certainly atypical.
The Western paradigm of medicine would rather just inject everyone with experimental mystery chemicals and keep them masked forever while pushing junk food and junk living. This, naturally, is why much of the West is now a wasteland of obesity, disease and death.
“I have seen high levels of fibrinogen in vaccinated patients awaiting surgical scheduling,” revealed another doctor, specifying that almost everyone has fibrinogen levels exceeding 900 mg/dl.
A massage practitioner explained that her vaccinated patients are seeing success reversing their vaccine damage by taking proteolytic enzymes. One patient claims to have “peed out the spike protein” upon taking proteolytic enzymes as her urine was “extremely dark for 3-4 days after / while experiencing flu-like / detoxification symptoms.”
A hospital worker posted that she is seeing “at least triple the emergency codes we had even a year ago.” It is not “covid cases” that the hospital is seeing, though, but rather stroke and cardiac events that appear to be linked to the spike proteins contained in the Covid injections.
[…]
US docs will lose their license for reporting vaccine injuries and providing informed consent to patients
By Dr Eddy Betterman
When physicians receive their medical license, they must pronounce their intellectual devotion and allegiance to the vaccine industry and its myriad of false narratives. Any healthcare professional who dares question “the science” risks losing their medical license. Any doctor who speaks out-of-line against forceful vaccine propaganda could be stripped of their title; their career destroyed; their reputation smeared.
On July 29, 2021, the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) warned all healthcare professionals that they could lose their medical license if they create or spread so-called “COVID-19 vaccine misinformation.”
No free speech for physicians, who are officially only allowed to spout vaccine propagandaDoctors are no longer allowed to say anything that could “sow distrust” about covid-19 vaccines, and they won’t be allowed to collect their own data, share information with other doctors, make observations, or draw their own conclusions. Doctors will no longer be allowed to speak out in interviews with the media, unless the interview promotes vaccines. Healthcare professionals are no longer allowed to speak up on social media, in their private medical practice, or on their own personal website. Wellness pioneer, Dr. Joseph Mercola, was even threatened to take down 25 years of research from his website.
Doctors will no longer be allowed to speak about the medical issues caused by the vaccines, and will inevitably file fewer vaccine injury reports with the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). This government reporting system has been flooded with vaccine injury reports in 2021, with hundreds of thousands of serious injuries and tens of thousands of wrongful death reports coming from the experimental covid-19 vaccines.
State medical boards demand allegiance to the vaccine industryThe FSMB represents every medical board across the United States and will now use their authority to gag doctors and control their practice. When the organization spots “COVID-19 vaccine misinformation” in interviews, medical literature, recorded discussions or social media posts, they will punish the doctor and refer them for disciplinary action with their respective state medical board. If a doctor divulges the risks of the vaccines, and the benefits of natural immunity, he could be targeted by the all-knowing, all-powerful FSMB. If a doctor provides informed consent, immune system solutions or treatment paths, his medical license could be suspended or revoked. Dr. Eric Nepute of St. Louis was even charged by the FTC for promoting zinc and vitamin D, two efficacious treatments. America’s Frontline Doctors and medical professionals across the country are facing many levels of censorship and intimidation.
The FSMB asserts: “Due to their specialized knowledge and training, licensed physicians possess a high degree of public trust and therefore have a powerful platform in society, whether they recognize it or not.”
“They also have an ethical and professional responsibility to practice medicine in the best interests of their patients and must share information that is factual, scientifically grounded and consensus-driven for the betterment of public health.”
The FSMB is now just another enforcement arm of the vaccine industry, controlling the speech of doctors and determining what the facts are. In this way, the vaccine industry treats doctors as unintelligible puppets who must spout out fraudulent narratives about immunity and health. This subservience to the vaccine industry is exacerbated by a federal government that claims “COVID-19 vaccine misinformation is killing people.” The federal government now admits that they and the Surgeon General work with social media platforms to eliminate information that does not worship vaccine “science.”
In truth, health care professionals are being threatened to abandon their conscience and their medical ethics. Basic medical principles such as informed consent are now considered “COVID-19 vaccine misinformation” if that information leads a patient to decide that a vaccine is not right for them. The FSMB is now violating the Nuremberg Code and will be enforcing GAVI’s vax-all agenda, which disregards the science of natural immunity and uses censorship to coerce and intimidate countless people to comply with needless medical fraud (covid-19 vaccination).
[…]
Tax-Funded Covid Vaccine Commercial So Strange People Thought It Was Satire
Sure looks like satire to me.
Street “hustler” tells people to get vaccinated.”I had no choice but to trust the vaccine,” he oddly states.
Source:Kelen McBreen
An Arkansas Department of Health video promoting Covid vaccinations is going viral for being unintentionally comedic.
In the state-funded commercial, a black man leaning against a classic Ford explains that during the pandemic his lifestyle “drastically changed.”
The man, an “entrepreneur” allegedly named Richard Johnson, says his income came to a screeching halt when Covid hit.
“You have to understand, I’m a hustler. I’m a legit entrepreneur. I sell things,” Johnson explains. “I come in contact with people all the time. I have to stay safe.”
It sure sounds as if he’s talking about selling drugs.
Next, Johnson made a strange comment, telling viewers, “I didn’t have a choice but to trust the vaccine.”
“If you live the type of lifestyle I live and you out here in…
View original post 132 more words
August 6, 2021
Physician Speaks Out Against ‘Vaccine Mandates for All’ — Especially Children and Those With Natural Immunity
Martin Adel “Marty” Makary is an American surgeon, professor and author.
In an interview with U.S. News & World Report, Dr. Marty Makary said the CDC’s relentless focus on vaccine-induced immunity and its “demonizing” of those who choose not to get the vaccine make the agency “the most slow, reactionary, political CDC in American history.”
Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and editor-in chief of MedPage Today, is pushing back against the growing drumbeat for mass vaccinations and COVID vaccine mandates.In an interview with U.S. New & World Reports, Makary said mandating vaccines for “every living, walking American” is not well-supported by science. Makary also expressed concerns about the two-dose vaccine regimen for adolescents.
[…]
Makary told U.S. News & World Report that as a physician, he believes “you win more bees with honey than with fire — referring to patients who don’t follow what “we ask them to do.”
Makary believes people “who choose not to get vaccinated are making a poor health decision at their own individual risk.” But he doesn’t believe the unvaccinated pose a public health threat to those who are already immune to the virus.
Makary said:
“Would we be so stern toward people making similar or worse health choices to smoke, drink alcohol or not wear a helmet when riding a bike? Over 85,000 Americans die annually from alcohol, yet we don’t have the same public health fervor or requirements to save those lives. Let’s encourage vaccination rather than activate the personal liberty culture wars that result in people becoming more entrenched in their opposition.”
Makary said that vaccinating everyone — including eventually every newborn — in order to control the pandemic is based on the false assumption that the risk of dying from COVID is equally distributed among the population — but it’s not, he said.
“We have always known that it’s very hard for the virus to hurt someone who is young and healthy,” Makary said. “And that’s still the case.”
[…]
No scientific support for requiring the vaccine for those with natural immunity
Makary said there is no scientific support for requiring the vaccine in people who have natural immunity — that is, immunity from prior COVID infection. There is zero clinical outcome data to support arguing dogmatically that natural immune individuals “must get vaccinated.”
Makary explained:
“During every month of this pandemic, I’ve had debates with other public researchers about the effectiveness and durability of natural immunity. I’ve been told that natural immunity could fall off a cliff, rendering people susceptible to infection. But here we are now, over a year and a half into the clinical experience of observing patients who were infected, and natural immunity is effective and going strong. And that’s because with natural immunity, the body develops antibodies to the entire surface of the virus, not just a spike protein constructed from a vaccine.”
A recent Israeli study affirmed the superiority of natural immunity. Health Ministry data on the wave of COVID outbreaks which began in May 2021, found a 6.72 times greater level of protection among those with natural immunity compared to those with vaccinated immunity.
In June, a Cleveland Clinic study found vaccinating people with natural immunity did not add to their level of protection.
The clinic studied 52,238 employees. Of those, 49,659 never had the virus and 2,579 had COVID and recovered. Of the 2,579 who previously were infected, 1,359 remained unvaccinated, compared with 22,777 who were vaccinated.
Not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study.
As The Defender reported, a December 2020 study by Singapore researchers found neutralizing antibodies (one prong of the immune response) remained present in high concentrations for 17 years or more in individuals who recovered from the original SARS-CoV.
More recently, the World Health Organization and National Institutes of Health (NIH) each published evidence of durable immune responses to natural infection with SARS-CoV-2.
[…]
Biden team’s misguided and deadly COVID-19 vaccine strategy
Deadly COVID-19 Vaccine Strategy Illustration by Linas Garsys/The Washington TimesBy Dr. Robert Malone and Peter Navarro
Vaccination ‘arms race’ could prove dangerous to the American publicThe Biden administration’s strategy to universally vaccinate in the middle of the pandemic is bad science and badly needs a reboot.
This strategy will likely prolong the most dangerous phase of the worst pandemic since 1918 and almost assuredly cause more harm than good – even as it undermines faith in the entire public health system.
Four flawed assumptions drive the Biden strategy. The first is that universal vaccination can eradicate the virus and secure economic recovery by achieving herd immunity throughout the country (and the world). However, the virus is now so deeply embedded in the world population that, unlike polio and smallpox, eradication is unachievable. SARS-CoV-2 and its myriad mutations will likely continually circulate, much like the common cold and influenza.The second assumption is that the vaccines are (near) perfectly effective. However, our currently available vaccines are quite “leaky.” While good at preventing severe disease and death, they only reduce, not eliminate, the risk of infection, replication, and transmission. As a slide deck from the Centers for Disease Control has revealed, even 100% acceptance of the current leaky vaccines combined with strict mask compliance will not stop the highly contagious Delta variant from spreading.
The third assumption is that the vaccines are safe. Yet scientists, physicians, and public health officials now recognize risks that are rare but by no means trivial. Known side effects include serious cardiac and thrombotic conditions, menstrual cycle disruptions, Bell’s Palsy, Guillain Barre syndrome, and anaphylaxis.
Unknown side effects which virologists fear may emerge include existential reproductive risks, additional autoimmune conditions, and various forms of disease enhancement, i.e., the vaccines can make people more vulnerable to reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 or reactivation of latent viral infections and associated diseases such as shingles. With good reason, the FDA has yet to approve the vaccines now administered under Emergency Use Authorization.
The failure of the fourth “durability” assumption is the most alarming and perplexing. It now appears our current vaccines are likely to offer a mere 180-day window of protection – a decided lack of durability underscored by scientific evidence from Israel and confirmed by Pfizer, the Department of Health and Human Services, and other countries.
Here, we are already being warned of the need for universal “booster” shots at six-month intervals for the foreseeable future. The obvious broader point that militates for individual vaccine choice is that repeated vaccinations, each with a small risk, can add up to a big risk.
[…]
Via https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/aug/5/biden-teams-misguided-and-deadly-covid-19-vaccine-/
Vaccine Propaganda BOT FARM Catapults Big Pharma Lies Across Social Media
By Lance D JohnsonSocial media algorithms are being used to not only identify and eliminate certain facts and truths, but these AI systems are also being used to promote certain types of propaganda, to brainwash the public into accepting falsehoods as if they are popular messages of truth. To make matters worse, unscrupulous operatives are using vaccine propaganda BOT FARMS to catapult Big Pharma’s lies across social media, to instill fear in the public and advocate for more government and corporate control over lives. The latest bot farm was caught spreading lies about the unvaccinated to garner public support for vaccine passports and a system of segregation against healthy, naturally-immune people. (See link for article)
__________________
Highlights:
Personalized messages are being sent en masse & verbatim across several media platforms using fake botsThese are fake accounts not sent by real healthcare professionalsThere may be paid internet trolls involvedBot farms can be controlled from a single computer, hooked up to multiple phones & social media accountsThis deceptive propaganda is being used to gain acceptance for lockdowns, shame and segregate the unvaccinated, discourage and demoralize people from speaking out and taking action and to give the impression that a lie is a universal truth accepted by manyDo not engage these bots as they are programmed to defend an agendaOne such fake message as seen from top graphic states:Another example of how Twitter has weaponized it’s community standards is from Colorado with Congressional candidate, Dr. Debby Burnett, who blatantly LIED about her “hospital” being full of COVID patients. The only problem? She’s a veterinarian. She seemingly also works part-time in Wyoming as a physical therapist but certainly does not work in the ICU. There were a total of 5 COVID patients in the entire Colorado Grand Junction metro area ICU. Further, the Montana Cheyenne metro area has a total of 12 COVID patients – also far from “being full of COVID patients.”The same article gave out another example of weaponizing social media when a person tweeted out a TikTok video of what appears to be a near relative of the banjo player in Deliverance reciting made up “facts”. She states there are ZERO ICU beds in Arkansas. The only problem is the actual data: (As of 8/5/21)“I just left the ER. We are officially back to getting rushed by COVID-19. Delta Variant is running rampant and it’s MUCH more transmissible than the original virus. 99% of our ICU admits did NOT receive a vaccine.”
Arkansas
Arkansas has reported having 1,059 staffed adult ICU beds. 458 are filled by non-COVID patients and 343 are filled by COVID patients. Overall, 801 out of 1,059 (76%) are filled.
By way of comparison, the usual occupancy rate for ICU beds is around 70%.
[…]
What Viruses are Being Studied by US Military Bio-Laboratories in Kazakhstan?
By Vladimir Platov – New Eastern Outlook – 06.08.2021
There’s been a lot of complaints lately about America’s continued activity in the field of biological weapons development, as there’s a growing list of reasons for those complaints to appear. One of the primary ones is the ongoing activity of more than 400 military biological laboratories created by the United States in 25 countries, including former Soviet republics – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
Although US politicial figures try to convince the rest of the world that those are merely “research centers” where American specialists help local scientists develop ways to combat dangerous diseases, Washington carefully supresses any information about what is actually taking place inside those military facilities. Elected officials of the above-mentioned have no real idea what goes on inside behind closed doors. The US centers deployed across those countries and the research facility at Fort Detrick military base, where Pentagon lab-coats have been working on weaponizng biology for decades are one and the same.
Suspicions about the involvement of foreign US bio-laboratories in the emergence of very strange diseases in the countries where such secret facilities exist are growing.
Thus, on July 30, Channel One Eurasia, a local Kazakh television station, reported an unexpected mass death of livestock from an unknown disease in two regions of Kazakhstan. In particular, livestock deaths were registered in the North-Kazakhstan region. Veterinarians speculate that this disease is blackleg, or emphysematous carbuncle, which has not been seen in this land for a very long time. The infection primarily affects young, immature animals that cannot yet be vaccinated due to their age. Mass mortality of livestock also occurs in the neighboring Akmola Region: in the villages of Azat and Karabulak, more than 500 heads of livestock fell ill.
Experts note that in recent years, epidemics of either unknown diseases or old, almost forgotten diseases considered to have been eradicated have periodically broken out in various regions of Kazakhstan. As a result, cattle are dying en masse. The public associates this with the American military biolab, located in Alma-Ata and whose activities remain out of the scope of formal ovesight not only of Kazakhstan, but international scientific circles as well.
[…]
The fact that the US has never stopped producing biological weapons, contrary to all international conventions, is no secret. And this is confirmed: there is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA in the Pentagon, which is engaged in developing and implementing the most advanced technologies in the military sphere. And it has a biotechnology department that does just that. The US Defense Department admits that their technology is dual-use. However, under US law, certain types of experiments are prohibited in the United States due to the threat they pose to the local population. This means that they are held abroad, including in the former Soviet Union area.
In October 2018, the American Journal of Science released an article titled “Agricultural Research or a New Biological Weapons System?” In this article, German and French microbiologists, concerned about the growing number of such laboratories near the borders of Russia and China, expressed the view that the US was preparing for a bacteriological war, thousands of kilometers away from their own borders. This article talked about a Pentagon program called Insect Allies, which involves major biological experiments and experiments whose results could be used for military purposes.
One of the first to speak out against foreign laboratories in Kazakhstan was Amirbek Togusov, former Kazakh Deputy Defense Minister who handed over to Russia materials about the US military’s experiments with deadly viruses in the summer of 2020.
[…]“We are like test monkeys here, and our territory is the Pentagon’s natural proving ground for testing new viruses… The laboratories are taken out of national control and work in secrecy,” General Amirbek Togusov said at the time. Shortly after that, General Togusov “died suddenly and unexpectedly.”
Andrew Jackson: America’s First Populist President
The Skeptic’s Guide to American History
Episode 6: Andrew Jackson: An Odd Symbol of Democracy
Mark Stoler Phd (2012)
Film Review
According to Stoler, President Andrew Jackson, a well-known populist, owes his 1828 election to the elimination of the property qualification (for male voters) that occurred in most states. On inauguration day in 1829, a mob of Jackson supporters took over the White House while the new president and his family fled.
Born into poverty, Jackson became a war hero during the 1815 Battle of New Orleans. At the time of his election, he was a wealthy Tennessee planter and slave owner. By this time, the Federalist Party had collapsed, leaving a single Democrat-Republican Party supporting limited government and states rights.
Although Jackson received a plurality of the popular vote, the electoral college vote was split between four candidates. The decision was referred to the House (as designated in the Constitution), which awarded the presidency to John Quincy Adams.
In the 1828 election, Jackson defeated Adams outright.
Despite Jackson’s reputation as a “man of the people,” Stoler gives many examples of undemocratic behavior on hos part: he apposed abolition of slavery and rights for women, Blacks and Native Americans; he supported the Postmasters’ Revolt (tje refusal by Southern postmasters to deliver abolitionist materials); he supported South Carolina during the Nullification Crisis;* he lobbied for the Indian Removal Acts (which authorized the military removal of southern tribes to federal lands west of the Mississippi), and he refused to enforce Supreme Court decisions he disagreed with.**
Sovereign money enthusiasts venerate Jackson for his closure of the industry-dominated Second National Bank (precursor to the Federal Reserve) in 1833. Closing the Second National Bank was a major campaign issue in 1832 – one that voters responded to by electing Jackson to a third term.
Stoler seems a bit confused about Jackson’s constitutional reasons (ie the Constitution specifically grants the power to create money to Congress, not to private central banks) for opposing the Second National Bank.
He also seems confused about British economist Adam Smith’s views on government intervention in a so-called “free market” economy. In Book V Revenue of the Sovereign or Commonwealth, Smith makes a compelling case that government intervention is essential in free markets to ensure economic growth and general prosperity.
*South Carolina declared the federal tariffs of 1828 and 1832 unconstitutional and refused to enforce them.
**One specific decision related to Georgia’s efforts to forcibly remove Cherokee from their state. Although the tribe won the decision, Jackson refused to honor it.
The film can be viewed free on Kanopy.
https://pukeariki.kanopy.com/video/andrew-jackson-odd-symbol-democracy
August 5, 2021
The Panic Pandemic: How Media Fearmongering Led to ‘Unprecedented’ Censorship of Scientific Research
John Tierney, a former The New York Times reporter, in an article for City Journal explained how the “moral panic that swept the nation’s guiding institutions” during the pandemic was far more catastrophic than the viral pandemic itself.
Story at-a-glance:John Tierney, a former reporter for The New York Times, looks back over the pandemic, providing a timeline of the media-induced viral panic that led to censorship and suppression of scientific research on an unprecedented scale.Experts who spoke out against the official narrative were attacked and accused of endangering lives by questioning lockdowns.Numerous research journals refused to publish the results of studies that featured data questioning lockdowns, masks and other COVID policies.Certain states have stood out for their refusal to buy into the draconian public health measures that were adopted throughout much of the U.S. — Florida is chief among them and has a COVID mortality rate that’s lower than the national average.The “crisis crisis,” or the ‘incessant state of alarm fomented by journalists and politicians,’ is one reason why so many government, academic and policy leaders could support rampant censorship and suppress scientific debate for so long, all while propagating panic.Now that we’re more than a year into the pandemic, it’s crystal clear that the panic that ensued was unnecessary and the draconian measures put into place for public health were unwarranted and harmful.
John Tierney, a former reporter for The New York Times, looked back over the pandemic, providing a timeline of the media-induced viral panic that led to censorship and suppression of scientific research on an unprecedented scale.
In his article for City Journal, where he is a contributing editor, he explained that the “moral panic that swept the nation’s guiding institutions” during the pandemic was far more catastrophic than the viral pandemic itself.
Media-induced panic set off in March 2020
The panic was started by journalists beginning in March 2020, when the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team released “Report 9” on the impact of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPSs) to reduce deaths and health care demand from COVID-19.
The report’s computer model projected that intensive care units in the U.S. would be overrun, with 30 COVID-19 patients for every available bed, and 2.2 million dead by summer. They concluded that “epidemic suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time,” which led to lockdowns, business and school closures and population-wide social distancing. But as Tierney noted:
“What had originally been a limited lockdown — ‘15 days to slow the spread’ — became long-term policy across much of the United States and the world.
“A few scientists and public-health experts objected, noting that an extended lockdown was a novel strategy of unknown effectiveness that had been rejected in previous plans for a pandemic. It was a dangerous experiment being conducted without knowing the answer to the most basic question: Just how lethal is this virus?”
John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at Stanford, was an early critic of the response, who argued that long-term lockdowns could cause more harm than good. Ioannidis came under intense fire after he and colleagues revealed that the COVID-19 fatality rate for those under the age of 45 is “almost zero,” and between the ages of 45 and 70, it’s somewhere between 0.05% and 0.3%.
In Santa Clara County, in particular, he and colleagues estimated that in late March 2020, the local COVID infection fatality rate was just 0.17%. “But merely by reporting data that didn’t fit the official panic narrative, they became targets,” Tierney explained. “… Mainstream journalists piled on with hit pieces quoting critics and accusing the researchers of endangering lives by questioning lockdowns.”
Journals refused to publish solid, anti-narrative research
The discrediting and censorship of researchers who spoke out against the official narrative — even if they included supportive data — became a common and alarming theme over the last year, one that extended to virtually every aspect of pandemic-related policy, including masks.
The “Danmask-19 Trial,” published Nov. 18, 2020, in the Annals of Internal Medicine, found that among mask wearers 1.8% (42 participants) ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% (53) among controls. When they removed the people who reported not adhering to the recommendations for use, the results remained the same — 1.8% (40 people), which suggests adherence makes no significant difference.
Initially, numerous research journals refused to publish the results, which called widespread mask mandates into question. Tierney said:
“When Thomas Benfield, one of the researchers in Denmark conducting the first large randomized controlled trial of mask efficacy against COVID, was asked why they were taking so long to publish the much-anticipated findings, he promised them as ‘as soon as a journal is brave enough to accept the paper.’
“After being rejected by The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA, the study finally appeared in the Annals of Internal Medicine, and the reason for the editors’ reluctance became clear: the study showed that a mask did not protect the wearer, which contradicted claims by the Centers for Disease Control and other health authorities.”
A similar experience was had by Dr. Stefan Baral, a Johns Hopkins epidemiologist with 350 publications, who wanted to publish a critique of lockdowns. It became the “first time in my career that I could not get a piece placed anywhere,” he told Tierney.
Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff also wrote a paper against lockdowns and couldn’t get it published, noting that most other scientists he spoke to were also against them but were afraid to speak up.
Kulldorff and colleagues soon banded together to write the Great Barrington Declaration, which calls for “focused protection” of the elderly and those in nursing homes and hospitals, while allowing businesses and schools to remain open. Soon after, they too were attacked
[…]
Civil Rights Group Sues George Mason University on Behalf of Professor Required to Get COVID Vaccine Despite Having Natural Immunity
By New Civil Liberties Alliance
The New Civil Liberties Alliance’s lawsuit says George Mason University’s attempt to interfere with Professor Zywicki’s bodily autonomy, with no legitimate rationale for doing so, not only violates medical ethics, but also fundamental rights protected in the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
George Mason University (GMU) is threatening employees with disciplinary action that includes “unpaid leave or possible loss of employment” if they don’t comply with the public university’s vaccine mandate.
On Aug. 4, the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of Antonin Scalia Law School Professor Todd Zywicki against GMU’s unconstitutional reopening policy for the Fall 2021 semester.
The policy requires all unvaccinated faculty and staff members, including those who can demonstrate natural immunity through recovery from a prior COVID-19 infection, to not only disclose their vaccination status as “a prerequisite for eligibility for any merit pay increases,” but also be forced into choosing between their health and personal autonomy and suffering serious detriment to their professional careers.
Zywicki has recovered from COVID-19 and thereby acquired robust natural immunity, as confirmed in multiple positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests during the past year. Zywicki’s immunologist, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, has advised him that, based on his personal health and immunity status, it is medically unnecessary to get a COVID-19 vaccine — and that it violates medical ethics to order unnecessary procedures.
“George Mason University’s arbitrary, irrational and unscientific policy forces our client, a tenured law school professor who has devoted his life to serving his community and his country, to ignore the medical advice of his own doctor,” said Jenin Younes, litigation counsel for NCLA. “Receiving the vaccine would provide neither Professor Zywicki nor the GMU community any benefit, since he already has demonstrable, robust natural immunity.”
Younes added: “GMU’s attempt to interfere with Professor Zywicki’s bodily autonomy, with no legitimate rationale for doing so, not only violates medical ethics, but also fundamental rights protected in the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”
Affidavits from Drs. Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff and Noorchashm explain that undergoing a full vaccination course creates a risk of harm and provides no benefit either to Zywicki or the GMU community.
[…]
The reopening policy also conflicts with federal law. None of the vaccines approved for use in the U.S. has received full Food and Drug Administration approval. Rather, they have only been granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) status, which means anyone offered the vaccine may withhold their informed consent.
The policy thus conflicts with the EUA statute and thereby violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which dictates that a state or local law is preempted when it creates “an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.”
[…]
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
