More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
November 28, 2021 - February 18, 2022
In the course of his IL-2 investigation, Dr. Fishbein stumbled on another awkward fact: Anthony Fauci personally owned patents to IL-2 and stood to make millions in royalties if the treatment won FDA approval.
A complete conflict of interest that shows his interests lie in greed and not safety.
Contemporaneous records obtained by the AP found that some fifty-one NIH scientists were then involved in testing products for which they secretly receive royalties; Dr. Fauci and his trusty longtime sidekick, Dr. H. Clifford Lane, “have received tens of thousands of dollars in royalties for an experimental AIDS treatment they invented
Even though his mandate was to enforce research policy, Dr. Fishbein had crossed the red line at NIAID. He was not just interfering with the drug-approval process: he was meddling with research in which Fauci had a peculiar interest.53
The challenge was daunting. All the players knew that Dr. Fauci was the only one with legal authority to fire Dr. Fishbein. NIAID human resources officers originally told Dr. Fishbein that Dr. Fauci had authorized his firing. Dr. Fauci later protested to various investigators from NIH and the US Congress that he had not ordered the firing.
Between February 14–18, after Tramont notified Dr. Fishbein that he was now reporting to Kagan—the same man whom he had recently cited for disciplinary action—Dr. Fishbein exchanged emails with Tramont (then traveling in Thailand) requesting an explanation for this odd demotion that had him working for a lower-level employee who was a key target of his misconduct investigation.
Tramont’s action, in the middle of a congressional investigation, was a naked gesture of defiance toward NIH’s congressional overlords from both political parties. It signaled HHS’s resolution to protect Dr. Fauci at any cost and to muzzle criticism by his principal detractor.
Kirschstein warned that Dr. Fauci’s efforts to fire Fishbein at the very least gave the “appearance of reprisal.” Kirschstein added that “It is clear that [Dr. Fauci’s AIDS Branch] is a troubled organization” and that Dr. Fishbein’s complaint “is clearly a sketch of a deeper issue.”57 Zerhouni kept quiet about these damning results from the agency’s internal investigations. Defying the Senate, he fired Dr. Fishbein on July 4, 2005.
The MSPB reinstated Dr. Fishbein after determining his firing was “wrongful retribution.” It was clear, however, that Dr. Fishbein had no future at NIH. He negotiated a termination deal.
Dr. Fishbein says of Dr. Fauci’s vendetta. “Everyone in science is terrified of crossing him. He’s like a mafia kingpin. He controls everything and everyone in public health.” Dr. Fishbein added, “He spreads so much money around and everyone knows he is vindictive. I had one friend tell me, ‘I can’t risk hiring you because I can’t afford to anger Fauci.’” Says Dr. Fishbein, “This was my first exposure to the cancel culture.”
“And the real losers in that battle,” added Farber, “were the millions of African women and babies forced to take Nevirapine, a drug that does not prevent AIDS but sickens and kills people who take it.” In the end, Dr. Fauci succeeded in rigging corrupt clinical trials, concealing catastrophic cheating, and deftly manipulating the politics to bring his dangerous and inefficacious drug, Nevirapine, to market.
The statistical gimmick of getting rid of the inert placebo control group would become a tool wielded by Dr. Fauci to gain approvals for hundreds of new drugs and vaccines, from AIDS to COVID.
HHS thereafter changed its royalty policies—a little—limiting royalty payments to contract employees to $150,000 per year, per employee, per patent.
As is typical of AIDS vaccine research, the NIH scientists cached the atrocity. Neither Gallo nor Zagury reported the deaths. Instead, Gallo vaunted the trial as a great success in the Lancet’s July 21, 1990, edition, audaciously claiming that there had been “no deaths” and “no complications or discomfort” among any of those to whom he administered the preparation.6
In 1992, an Air Force medical office accused Redfield of engaging in “a systematic pattern of data manipulation, inappropriate statistical analyses and misleading data presentation in an apparent attempt to promote the usefulness of the GP160 AIDS vaccine.”
Redfield’s bold gambit worked. Bamboozled by Redfield’s brazen ballyhoo, Congress immediately appropriated $20 million to the military to support Redfield and Birx’s research project.19 Enraged military prosecutors wanted to court-martial Redfield. But as Public Citizen complained in a 1994 letter to the Congressional Committee’s Chairman, Henry Waxman, the dedicated budget hikes promised by Congress prompted the Army to kill the investigation, silence its own prosecutors, and “whitewash” Redfield’s misdeeds.
Moreover, Redfield had an inside track through Birx and through his military confederates to the vast Pentagon budgets for bioweapons and infectious disease.
The trio—none of whom ever treated a COVID patient—adopted controversial strategies to confine the nation under house arrest, shut down the global economy, deny the public access to early treatment and lifesaving therapeutics like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, excite persistent public terror through the broadcasts of deliberately exaggerated death and case counts, and repeatedly tell the world that “the only path back to normal is a miraculous vaccine.”
Rockefeller’s crusade caused the closure of more than half of American medical schools; fostered public and press scorn for homeopathy, osteopathy, chiropractic, nutritional, holistic, functional, integrative, and natural medicines; and led to the incarceration of many practicing physicians.
“Miasma theory” emphasizes preventing disease by fortifying the immune system through nutrition and by reducing exposures to environmental toxins and stresses. Miasma exponents posit that disease occurs where a weakened immune system provides germs an enfeebled target to exploit.
Germ theory aficionados, in contrast, blame disease on microscopic pathogens. Their approach to health is to identify the culpable germ and tailor a poison to kill it. Miasmists complain that those patented poisons may themselves further weaken the immune system, or simply open the damaged terrain to a competitive germ or cause chronic disease. They point out that the world is teeming with microbes—many of them beneficial—and nearly all of them harmless to a healthy, well-nourished immune system.
And just as the military-industrial complex prospers in war, the pharmaceutical cartel profits most from sick and malnourished populations.
On his deathbed, the victorious Pasteur is said to have recanted, “Béchamp was right,” declaring, “the microbe is nothing. The terrain is everything.”
A comprehensive study of this foundational assertion published in 2000 in the high-gravitas journal Pediatrics by CDC and Johns Hopkins scientists concluded, after reviewing a century of medical data, that “vaccination does not account for the impressive decline in mortality from infectious diseases . . . in the 20th century.”
found that all medical interventions including vaccines, surgeries, and antibiotics accounted for less than about 1 percent—and no more than 3.5 percent—of the dramatic mortality declines.
Kass recognized that the real heroes of public health were not the medical profession, but rather the engineers who brought us sewage treatment plants, railroads, roads, and highways for transporting food, electric refrigerators, and chlorinated water.
These graphs demonstrate that mortalities for virtually all the great killer diseases, infectious and otherwise, declined with advances in nutrition and sanitation.
Epidemics rarely occur in affluent societies, because these societies offer conditions (sufficient nutrition, clean drinking water, etc.) which allow many people to keep their immune systems so fit that microbes simply do not have a chance to multiply abnormally.
The facts suggest that it is the absence of such reliable metrics and science-based analysis that allows Gates and Fauci to get away with their dubious claims about the efficacy and safety of their prescriptions.
The Rockefeller Foundation launched a “public-private partnership” with pharmaceutical companies called the International Health Commission, which set about feverishly inoculating the hapless populations of the colonized tropics with a yellow fever jab.56 The vaccine killed its beneficiaries in droves and failed to prevent yellow fever.
The RF imbued the League with its philosophy, structure, values, precepts, and ideologies, all of which its successor body, the WHO, inherited at its inauguration in 1948.
That white paper made the same complaints against the Rockefeller Foundation that contemporary critics level against the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation:
But the RF rarely addressed the most important causes of death, notably infantile diarrhea and tuberculosis, for which technical fixes were not then available and which demanded long-term, socially oriented investments, such as improved housing, clean water, and sanitation systems. The RF avoided disease campaigns that might be costly, complex, or time-consuming (other than yellow fever, which imperiled [the military, and] commerce). Most campaigns were narrowly construed so that quantifiable targets (insecticide spraying or medication distribution, for example) could be set, met, and counted
...more
Gates’s wealth expanded by $23 billion just during the 2020 lockdowns that he and Dr. Fauci played key roles in orchestrating.
Gates’s pharmaceutical investments are particularly relevant to this chapter. Since shortly after its founding, his foundation has owned stakes in multiple drug companies. A recent investigation by The Nation revealed that the Gates Foundation currently holds corporate stocks and bonds in drug companies like Merck, GSK, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, and Sanofi.69 Gates also has heavy positions in Gilead, Biogen, AstraZeneca, Moderna, Novavax, and Inovio. The foundation’s website candidly declares its mission to “seek more effective models of collaboration with major vaccine manufacturers to
...more
Dr. Fauci had, by then, persuaded a succession of US presidents to burnish their humanitarian bona fides by redirecting US foreign aid away from the causes of nutrition, sanitation, and economic development and toward solving Africa’s HIV crisis with vaccines and drugs.
In 2008, the Journal of the European Molecular Biology Organization published a peer-reviewed article examining how the Gates/Fauci partnership had skewed NIH funding to reflect Gates’s priorities, “The Grand Impact of the Gates Foundation.
There is little objective evidence that all the treasure has extended or improved the lives of Africans, but every penny accrued to Fauci’s reputation as Africa’s foreign aid Golconda. When it came to public health policy in Africa, Dr. Fauci owned the keys to the kingdom. Gates needed Dr. Fauci to unlock the door.
Buried near the end of the New York Times article were some key facts. It turned out that the vaccine was not only ineffective, but researchers reported alarming safety signals that caused a safety monitoring committee to halt the study. Furthermore, instead of preventing infection, the Merck/NIAID researchers reported data suggesting the vaccine actually raised the risk of contracting HIV!86
On February 3, 2020, Julie Steenhuysen of Reuters reported that NIAID had suddenly halted its clinical trial of its most promising HIV vaccine to date. NIAID was in the middle of Phase 3 trials on more than 5,000 South Africans when they realized that once again, the vaccine was raising the risk of AIDS in vaccinated individuals.
The thousands of doctors, hospital administrators, health officials, and research virologists whose positions, careers, and salaries depend on AIDS dollars flowing from Dr. Fauci, Mr. Gates, and the Wellcome Trust (Great Britain’s version of the Gates Foundation) are the officers and soldiers in a mercenary army that functions to defend all vaccines and Dr. Fauci’s HIV/AIDS doxologies.
In 2020, many of the Gates/Fauci HIV vaccine trials in Africa suddenly became COVID-19 vaccine trials, as the unprecedented tsunami of new COVID-19 plunder began flowing through Dr. Fauci to the same disciplined legions of the virology caste.
Their exquisitely disciplined ranks also supplied the “independent experts” who populated the FDA and CDC committees that approved those shoddily tested COVID pokes, the doctors and “medical ethicists” who appeared on TV to run interference for every government-mandated COVID-19 countermeasure: masks, lockdowns, social distancing, and vaccination—including justifying the jab for children and pregnant women.
By then, the Fauci/Gates arsenal of COVID pokes were topping the all-time charts for medical moneymaking by their pharma partners with Pfizer alone projecting $96 billion in COVID vaccine sales.
On July 25, 2021, Dr. Fauci expanded on this exciting communiqué by announcing a new multibillion-dollar government initiative to use taxpayer money and NIAID-patented mRNA technology to prepare distinct new vaccines for twenty families of viruses that might spark future pandemics.
At worst, in the words of Loffredo and Greenstein, Gates and his foundation function “as a trojan horse for Western corporations, which of course have no goal greater than an increased bottom line. . . .
“From my point of view, it’s more like [the Gates Foundation] are selling technology than solving problems. Most of their calls have to do with developing some new technology or vaccines.”123
Pharmaceutical companies cement WHO’s institutional bias toward vaccines with approximately $70 million of their own direct contributions.
McGoey observes that “Virtually every significant decision at WHO is first vetted by the Gates Foundation.”
In 2011, Gates spoke at the WHO, ordering that “All 193 member states, you must make vaccines a central focus of your health systems.”129 The following year, the World Health Assembly, which sets the WHO agenda, adopted a “Global Vaccine Plan” that the Gates Foundation coauthored.
By 2017, Gates’s power was so complete that he handpicked his deputy, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, as the WHO’s new director general despite complaints that Tedros would be the first director general to the WHO without a medical degree and despite Tedros’s dubious background.
