The War with Medical Fascism

[Crafty_Dog]

https://twitter.com/spacepirate144/status/1604425309503176704?s=61&t=nE-9upQ2QM3SbKPhGbVE1g

[ccp]

I dunno
I had 4 moderna shots

and, maybe a had, extremely mild headache or tired for 24 hr

injection site mild sore

big deal

SYSTEMIC SIDE EFFECTS !

[DougMacG]

I dunno
I had 4 moderna shots

and, maybe a had, extremely mild headache or tired for 24 hr

injection site mild sore

big deal

SYSTEMIC SIDE EFFECTS !

I don't think there is any question that more than 99 out of 100 did not die from the vaccine or have heart or clot issues, even if there are major undisclosed unintended consequences from it.

I think of the Twitter FBI story as authorities keeping information from the public and putting out disinformation - to the public.

ccp introduces a different angle.  Were they blocking relevant information from getting to our doctors and care givers?
 
When we only hear these developments on right wing sources, it doesn't seem as real as when it's on the front page of 'the news' (or the medical journals), even though their credibility may be worse than ours.

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/chinas-covid-chaos-a-horrible-indictment-of-us-leadership-for-emulating-ccp-lockdowns-former-white-house-adviser_4950438.html?utm_source=China&src_src=China&utm_campaign=uschina-2022-12-30&src_cmp=uschina-2022-12-30&utm_medium=email&est=3g7llI%2BDUQEGXZzN%2BSbvywvqGaIEoVwqVp1PquT0ho2x34vBCtaqo%2FbeImXJSoIvEq0W

[Crafty_Dog]

Are Vaccines Fueling New Covid Variants?
The virus appears to be evolving in ways that evade immunity.
Allysia Finley hedcutBy Allysia Finley


Jan. 1, 2023 10:08 am ET


Public-health experts are sounding the alarm about a new Omicron variant dubbed XBB that is rapidly spreading across the Northeast U.S. Some studies suggest it is as different from the original Covid strain from Wuhan as the 2003 SARS virus. Should Americans be worried?

It isn’t clear that XBB is any more lethal than other variants, but its mutations enable it to evade antibodies from prior infection and vaccines as well as existing monoclonal antibody treatments. Growing evidence also suggests that repeated vaccinations may make people more susceptible to XBB and could be fueling the virus’s rapid evolution.


Prior to Omicron’s emergence in November 2021, there were only four variants of concern: Alpha, Beta, Delta and Gamma. Only Alpha and Delta caused surges of infections globally. But Omicron has begotten numerous descendents, many of which have popped up in different regions of the world curiously bearing some of the same mutations.

“Such rapid and simultaneous emergence of multiple variants with enormous growth advantages is unprecedented,” a Dec. 19 study in the journal Nature notes. Under selective evolutionary pressures, the virus appears to have developed mutations that enable it to transmit more easily and escape antibodies elicited by vaccines and prior infection.


The same study posits that immune imprinting may be contributing to the viral evolution. Vaccines do a good job of training the immune system to remember and knock out the original Wuhan variant. But when new and markedly different strains come along, the immune system responds less effectively.

Bivalent vaccines that target the Wuhan and BA.5 variants (or breakthrough infections with the latter) prompt the immune system to produce antibodies that target viral regions the two strains have in common. In Darwinian terms, mutations that allow the virus to evade common antibodies win out—they make it “fitter.”

XBB has evolved to elude antibodies induced by the vaccines and breakthrough infections. Hence, the Nature study suggests, “current herd immunity and BA.5 vaccine boosters may not efficiently prevent the infection of Omicron convergent variants.”

A New England Journal of Medicine study published last month provides more evidence of the vulnerability caused by immune imprinting. Neutralizing antibodies of people who had received the bivalent were 26 times as high against the original Wuhan variant as they were against XBB and four times as high as they were against Omicron and the BA.5 variant.

Similarly, a study this month in the journal Cell found that antibody levels of people who had received four shots were 145 times as high against the original Wuhan strain as the XBB variant. A bivalent booster only slightly increased antibodies against XBB. Experts nevertheless claim that boosters improve protection against XBB. That’s disinformation, to use their favored term.


A Cleveland Clinic study that tracked its healthcare workers found that bivalent vaccines reduced the risk of getting infected by 30% while the BA.5 variant was spreading. But, as the study explained, the reason might be that workers who were more cautious—i.e., more likely to wear N95 masks and avoid large gatherings—may have also been more likely to get boosted.


Notably, workers who had received more doses were at higher risk of getting sick. Those who received three more doses were 3.4 times as likely to get infected as the unvaccinated, while those who received two were only 2.6 times as likely.

“This is not the only study to find a possible association with more prior vaccine doses and higher risk of COVID-19,” the authors noted. “We still have a lot to learn about protection from COVID-19 vaccination, and in addition to a vaccine’s effectiveness it is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed.”

Two years ago, vaccines were helpful in reducing severe illness, particularly among the elderly and those with health risks like diabetes and obesity. But experts refuse to concede that boosters have yielded diminishing benefits and may even have made individuals and the population as a whole more vulnerable to new variants like XBB.

It might not be a coincidence that XBB surged this fall in Singapore, which has among the highest vaccination and booster rates in the world. Over the past several weeks a XBB strain has become predominant in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts, making up about three-quarters of virus samples that have been genetically sequenced. The variant has been slower to take off in other regions, making up only 6% of the Midwest and about 20% in the South. The Northeast is also the most vaccinated and boosted region in the country.

Hospitalizations in the Northeast have risen too, but primarily among those over 70. One reason may be that the T-Cell response—the cavalry riding behind the front-line antibodies—is weaker in older people. The virus can’t evade T-Cells elicited by vaccines and infections as easily as it can antibodies. Because of T-Cells, younger people are still well-protected against new variants.

Another reason may be that monoclonal antibodies are ineffective against XBB, and many older people who catch Covid can’t take the antiviral Paxlovid because they have medical conditions such as severe kidney disease or take drugs that interfere with it.

The Biden administration’s monomaniacal focus on vaccines over new treatments has left the highest-risk Americans more vulnerable to new variants. Why doesn’t that seem to worry the experts?

[Crafty_Dog]

2. AB 2098: ‘COVID Misinformation’ – This law, signed in September, requires California’s medical licensing boards to take disciplinary action against doctors who are involved with the “dissemination of misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or ‘COVID-19’.” The law does not take into account the fact that authorities like Dr. Anthony Fauci changed their recommendations over time.

 

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bOHYZhL0WQ&t=5s

[Crafty_Dog]

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/3326769/open-borders-is-fentanyl-freeway

[Crafty_Dog]

The White House Covid Censorship Machine
Newly released emails show how officials coerce social-media companies to toe the government line.
By Jenin Younes and Aaron Kheriaty
Jan. 8, 2023 5:23 pm ET


Newly released documents show that the White House has played a major role in censoring Americans on social media. Email exchanges between Rob Flaherty, the White House’s director of digital media, and social-media executives prove the companies put Covid censorship policies in place in response to relentless, coercive pressure from the White House—not voluntarily. The emails emerged Jan. 6 in the discovery phase of Missouri v. Biden, a free-speech case brought by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana and four private plaintiffs represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance.

On March 14, 2021, Mr. Flaherty emailed a Facebook executive (whose name we’ve redacted as a courtesy) with the subject line “You are hiding the ball” and a link to a Washington Post article about Facebook’s own research into “the spread of ideas that contribute to vaccine hesitancy,” as the paper put it. “I think there is a misunderstanding,” the executive wrote back. “I don’t think this is a misunderstanding,” Mr. Flaherty replied. “We are gravely concerned that your service is one of the top drivers of vaccine hesitancy—period. . . . We want to know that you’re trying, we want to know how we can help, and we want to know that you’re not playing a shell game. . . . This would all be a lot easier if you would just be straight with us.”

On March 21, after failing to placate Mr. Flaherty, the Facebook executive sent an email detailing the company’s planned policy changes. They included “removing vaccine misinformation” and “reducing the virality of content discouraging vaccines that does not contain actionable misinformation.” Facebook characterized this material as “often-true content” that “can be framed as sensation, alarmist, or shocking.” Facebook pledged to “remove these Groups, Pages, and Accounts when they are disproportionately promoting this sensationalized content.”

In that exchange, Mr. Flaherty demanded to know what Facebook was doing to “limit the spread of viral content” on WhatsApp, a private message app, especially “given its reach in immigrant communities and communities of color.” The company responded three weeks later with a lengthy list of promises.

On April 9, Mr. Flaherty asked “what actions and changes you’re making to ensure . . . you’re not making our country’s vaccine hesitancy problem worse.” He faulted the company for insufficient zeal in earlier efforts to control political speech: “In the electoral context, you tested and deployed an algorithmic shift that promoted quality news and information about the election. . . . You only did this, however, after an election that you helped increase skepticism in, and an insurrection which was plotted, in large part, by your platform. And then you turned it back off. I want some assurances, based in data, that you are not doing the same thing again here.” The executive’s response: “Understood.”

On April 14, Mr. Flaherty pressed the executive about why “the top post about vaccines today” is Tucker Carlson “saying they don’t work”: “I want to know what ‘Reduction’ actually looks like,” he said. The exec responded: “Running this down now.”

On April 23, Mr. Flaherty sent the executive an internal memo that he claimed had been circulating in the White House. It asserts that “Facebook plays a major role in the spread of COVID vaccine misinformation” and accuses the company of, among other things, “failure to monitor events hosting anti-vaccine and COVID disinformation” and “directing attention to COVID-skeptics/anti-vaccine ‘trusted’ messengers.”

On May 10, the executive sent Mr. Flaherty a list of steps Facebook had taken “to increase vaccine acceptance.” Mr. Flaherty scoffed, “Hard to take any of this seriously when you’re actively promoting anti-vaccine pages in search,” and linked to an NBC reporter’s tweet. The executive wrote back: “Thanks Rob—both of the accounts featured in this tweet have been removed from Instagram entirely for breaking our policies.”

President Biden, press secretary Jen Psaki and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy later publicly vowed to hold the platforms accountable if they didn’t heighten censorship. On July 16, 2021, a reporter asked Mr. Biden his “message to platforms like Facebook.” He replied, “They’re killing people.” Mr. Biden later claimed he meant users, not platforms, were killing people. But the record shows Facebook itself was the target of the White House’s pressure campaign.

Mr. Flaherty also strong-armed Google in April 2021, accusing YouTube (which it owns) of “funneling” people into vaccine hesitancy. He said this concern was “shared at the highest (and I mean the highest) levels of the WH,” and required “more work to be done.” Mr. Flaherty demanded to know what further measures Google would take to remove disfavored content. An executive responded that the company was working to “address your concerns related to Covid-19 misinformation.”


These emails establish a clear pattern: Mr. Flaherty, representing the White House, expresses anger at the companies’ failure to censor Covid-related content to his satisfaction. The companies change their policies to address his demands. As a result, thousands of Americans were silenced for questioning government-approved Covid narratives. Two of the Missouri plaintiffs, Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, are epidemiologists whom multiple social-media platforms censored at the government’s behest for expressing views that were scientifically well-founded but diverged from the government line—for instance, that children and adults with natural immunity from prior infection don’t need Covid vaccines.

Emails made public through earlier lawsuits, Freedom of Information Act requests and Elon Musk’s release of the Twitter Files had already exposed a sprawling censorship regime involving the White House as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies. The government directed tech companies to remove certain types of material and even to censor specific posts and accounts. Again, these included truthful messages casting doubt on the efficacy of masks and challenging Covid-19 vaccine mandates.

The First Amendment bars government from engaging in viewpoint-based censorship. The state-action doctrine bars government from circumventing constitutional strictures by suborning private companies to accomplish forbidden ends indirectly.

Defenders of the government have fallen back on the claim that cooperation by the tech companies was voluntary, from which they conclude that the First Amendment isn’t implicated. The reasoning is dubious, but even if it were valid, the premise has now been proved false.

The Flaherty emails demonstrate that the federal government unlawfully coerced the companies in an effort to ensure that Americans would be exposed only to state-approved information about Covid-19. As a result of that unconstitutional state action, Americans were given the false impression of a scientific “consensus” on critically important issues around Covid-19. A reckoning for the government’s unlawful, deceptive and dangerous conduct is under way in court.

Ms. Younes, litigation counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance, represents the private plaintiffs in Missouri v. Biden. Dr. Kheriaty is a senior scholar at the Brownstone Institute, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and one of the plaintiffs.

[Crafty_Dog]

second

From the Twitter Files: Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieb secretly pressed Twitter to hide posts challenging his company's massively profitable Covid jabs
To funnel his demands, Gottlieb used the same Twitter lobbyist the White House did - fresh evidence of overlap between the company selling mRNA shots and the government forcing them on the public.
ALEX BERENSON
JAN 9

 



SAVE
▷  LISTEN
 
On August 27, 2021, Dr. Scott Gottlieb - a Pfizer director with over 550,000 Twitter followers - saw a tweet he didn’t like, a tweet that might hurt sales of Pfizer’s mRNA vaccines.

The tweet explained correctly that natural immunity after Covid infection was superior to vaccine protection. It called on the White House to “follow the science” and exempt people with natural immunity from upcoming vaccine mandates.

It came not from an “anti-vaxxer” like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but from Dr. Brett Giroir, a physician who had briefly followed Gottlieb as the head of the Food & Drug Administration. Further, the tweet actually encouraged people who did not have natural immunity to “Get vaccinated!”

No matter.

By suggesting some people might not need Covid vaccinations, the tweet could raise questions about the shots. Besides being former FDA commissioner, a CNBC contributor, and a prominent voice on Covid public policy, Gottlieb was a senior board member at Pfizer, which depended on mRNA jabs for almost half its $81 billion in sales in 2021. Pfizer paid Gottlieb $365,000 for his work that year.

Gottlieb stepped in, emailing Todd O’Boyle, a top lobbyist in Twitter’s Washington office who was also Twitter’s point of contact with the White House.

The post was “corrosive,” Gottlieb wrote. He worried it would “end up going viral and driving news coverage.”


(SOURCE: Twitter)

I found the email in a search of records I ran at Twitter last week - part of Elon Musk’s “Twitter Files” effort to raise the veil on censorship decisions Twitter made before Musk bought the company in October.

I went into detail about my involvement at the Twitter Files in a Substack article yesterday. I plan more reporting on the files in the weeks to come.

—

(GET THE TRUTH BIG PHARMA WISHES YOU WOULDN’T SEE!)

Upgrade to paid

—

Through Jira, an internal system Twitter used for managing complaints, O’Boyle forwarded Gottlieb’s email to the Twitter “Strategic Response” team. That group was responsible for handling concerns from the company’s most important employees and users.

“Please see this report from the former FDA commissioner,” O’Boyle wrote - failing to mention that Gottlieb was a Pfizer board member with a financial interest in pushing mRNA shots.

A Strategic Response analyst quickly found the tweet did not violate any of the company’s misinformation rules.

Yet Twitter wound up flagging Giroir’s tweet anyway, putting a misleading tag on it and preventing almost anyone from seeing it. It remains tagged even though several large studies have confirmed the truth of Giroir’s words.


(SOURCE)

—

A week later, on Sept. 3, 2021, Gottlieb tried to strike again, complaining to O’Boyle about a tweet from Justin Hart. Hart is a lockdown and Covid vaccine skeptic with more than 100,000 Twitter followers.

“Sticks and stones may break my bones but a viral pathogen with a child mortality rate of <>0% has cost our children nearly three years of schooling,” Hart had written.

Why Gottlieb objected to Hart’s words is not clear, but the Pfizer shot would soon be approved for children 5 to 11, representing another massive market for Pfizer, if parents could be convinced Covid was a real threat to their kids.

O’Boyle referred to “former FDA Commissioner Gottlieb” when he forwarded the report, again ignoring Gottlieb’s current work for Pfizer.

This time, though, Gottlieb’s complaint was so far afield that Twitter refused to act.

—

At the same time, Gottlieb was also pressing Twitter to act against me, as I disclosed on Substack on Oct. 13, 2022, drawing on documents that Twitter’s pre-Musk regime provided to me as part of my lawsuit against it. (Gottlieb’s action was part of a larger conspiracy that included the Biden White House and Andrew Slavitt, working publicly and privately to pressure Twitter until it had no choice but to ban me. I will have more to say about my own case and will be suing the White House, Slavitt, Gottlieb, and Pfizer shortly.)

The morning after I wrote that article, Gottlieb appeared on CNBC, the financial news channel where he is a contributor, and offered what at best was a seriously misleading explanation of his actions and his motives.

Gottlieb did not deny pressing Twitter on me - he could not, given the documents I had released the night before.

But in an interview with Joe Kernan of CNBC, Gottlieb said he had asked Twitter to act only because he was concerned if tweets raised the threat of violence against vaccine advocates.

“The inability of these platforms to police direct threats, physical threats about people, that’s my concern about what’s going on in that ecosystem,” Gottlieb said.


SOURCE

"I'm unconcerned about debate being made,” Gottlieb told Kernan. “I'm concerned about physical threats being made for people's safety."

In a tweet that morning, Gottlieb doubled down, writing:

Respectful debate and dialogue is one thing, and should be encouraged and protected. But there's no place for targeted harassment, and misleading dialogue which can instigate a small but persuadable group of people to make targeted and dangerous threats.

But Brett Giroir’s tweet about natural immunity was the definition of “respectful debate and dialogue.” And in his own email to Todd O’Boyle, Gottlieb did not raise any security concerns about it. He simply complained that it might wind up “driving news coverage.

—

Gottlieb is not just a Pfizer board member.

He is one of seven members of the board’s executive committee and the head of its regulatory and compliance committee, which oversees “compliance with laws, regulations, and internal procedures applicable to pharmaceutical sales and marketing activities.”

Pfizer has a long history of violating drug industry laws and ethics rules. In 2009, it agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in American history, for fraudulently marketing several drugs. In 1996, it conducted a clinical trial of an antibiotic in Nigeria in which 11 children died and which became the inspiration for John le Carre’s novel The Constant Gardner.

[Crafty_Dog]

Pfizer Board Member Pressured Twitter to Censor Posts on Natural Immunity, Low COVID Risk to Children: Emails
By Zachary Stieber January 9, 2023 Updated: January 10, 2023biggersmaller Print

0:00
5:57



1

A Pfizer board member who used to head the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lobbied Twitter to take action against a post accurately pointing out that natural immunity is superior to COVID-19 vaccination, according to an email released on Jan. 9.

Dr. Scott Gottlieb wrote on Aug. 27, 2021, to Twitter executive Todd O’Boyle to request Twitter take action against a post from Dr. Brett Giroir, another former FDA commissioner.

“This is the kind of stuff that’s corrosive. Here he draws a sweeping conclusion off a single retrospective study in Israel that hasn’t been peer reviewed. But this tweet will end up going viral and driving news coverage,” Gottlieb wrote.

Giroir had written that it was clear natural immunity, or post-infection immunity, “is superior to vaccine immunity, by ALOT.” He said there was no scientific justification to require proof of COVID-19 vaccination if a person had natural immunity. “If no previous infection? Get vaccinated!” he also wrote.

Giroir pointed to what was at the time a preprint study from Israeli researchers that found, after analyzing health records, that natural immunity provided better protection than vaccination. The study was later published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases following peer review.

Researchers said the data “demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.” BNT162b2 is the trade name for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, which is the main shot used in Israel.

Gottlieb’s email triggered messages on Jira, Twitter’s internal messaging system, according to journalist Alex Berenson, who was granted access to Twitter’s internal files by CEO Elon Musk.

“Please see this report from the former FDA commissioner,” O’Boyle wrote.

A Twitter analyst who reviewed the post determined it did not violate any misinformation rules but Twitter still put a tag on it, claiming to all users who viewed it that it was “misleading” and directing them to a link that would show “why health officials recommend a vaccine for most people.” The tag prevented people from replying to, sharing, or liking Giroir’s post.

Gottlieb, Twitter, and Giroir, now the CEO of Altesa BioSciences, did not respond to requests for comment.

Another Message
Gottlieb later messaged O’Boyle again, flagging a post from Justin Hart, a critic of lockdowns and a skeptic of COVID-19 vaccines, Berenson reported.

Gottlieb took issue with Hart writing that “sticks and stones may break my bones but a viral pathogen with a child mortality rate of <>0% has cost our children nearly three years of schooling.”

COVID-19 poses little mortality risk to young, healthy people, studies and data show.

Gottlieb did not detail why he wanted to censor Hart, but the objection came shortly before the U.S. government authorized and recommended Pfizer’s vaccine for children aged 5 to 11.

O’Boyle sent the request to Twitter analysts, failing for a second time to disclose Gottlieb’s ties to Pfizer. The complaint did not trigger any action.

“Our team of ragtag analysts, activists, moms and dads have been going after Scott since April 2020 when he repeatedly advocated for school closures and lockdowns. He doesn’t like people pushing back on the narrative,” Hart told The Epoch Times in a Twitter message.

Tried to Get Journalist Banned
Gottlieb also tried to get Berenson, a former New York Times reporter who now authors a Substack, banned from Twitter, a message released in 2022 showed.

The message showed that Gottlieb forwarded a blog post from Berenson to a Twitter worker, writing that Berenson calling Dr. Anthony Fauci arrogant was an example of why Fauci, at the time the head of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, needed a security detail.

Four days later, and a day after Gottlieb met with Twitter workers, Twitter banned Berenson for allegedly violating its rules on COVID-19 misinformation.

Gottlieb defended his actions.

[ccp]

battacharyia and berenson

could increase their credibility with + corona vaccines studies
instead of tooting their own horns 24/7 solely with anything negative they can churn up:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm715152e2.htm

[DougMacG]

Really good point ccp.  All I've seen since it started is sources that push only the positive and sources that publish only the negative. Then everything changes, new variants, new vaccines, and we start seeing old data that doesn't help with current decisions except to prove someone else was wrong in hindsight, IF the study was valid and properly interpreted.

I've not had a shot since the first round, June of 2020.  Still mad about being lied to then.  My understanding was 95% effective against catching covid, but that was against 'alpha' and the risk by that time was 'delta'.  (And zero health risk which also wasn't true.) Then I caught 'omicron' 6 months later. (Now that immunity has worn off.)  My vaccination maybe helped with severity but not with prevention.  Fair enough but not my reason for taking it.

Now we have XBB.1.5 but the latest vaccine is aimed at BA.5.
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2023/what-you-need-to-know-about-xbb15-the-latest-omicron-variant

 If the next vaccine to come out has perfect effectiveness and safety, how would I know?

And if the next vaccine to come out is really dangerous, I would only hear that from Alex Berenson and the negative sources.

[DougMacG]

I remember when Dr. Scott Gottleib was one of the good guys.

Being on the Board of Pfizer is not the best position to speak freely with unbiased, disinterested opinions.

[Crafty_Dog]

Looks to me like there is still no serious effort to distinguish vaxxers with natural antibodies in the data.  Therefore, IMHO all efficacy data is tainted.

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2023/01/pentagon-rescinds-covid-vaccine-mandate/381684/

[Crafty_Dog]

third

https://gab.com/LaurenWitzkeDE/posts/109665365724214390

[Crafty_Dog]

How the U.S. Government and Social Media Stifled the Covid Conversation
By PRADHEEP J. SHANKER
January 12, 2023 6:30 AM

Our government, in coordination with large, powerful corporations, intentionally limited the spread of dissenting opinions and ideas during the pandemic.

The release of internal Twitter communications, thanks to the actions of the company’s new owner, Elon Musk, has provided the public with a unique view of how our government, in coordination with large, powerful corporations, intentionally suppressed dissenting opinions and ideas about Covid and Covid policies. Amid our vigorous and often angry debates over the pandemic and the way it was handled, political actors were working with Twitter to limit the speech of certain voices challenging what had become the “official” line.

In a December release of one batch of the Twitter Files, journalist David Zweig revealed how the Trump and Biden administrations both actively pushed social media to suppress the opinions of certain scientists, thinkers, and physicians in their discussions of the U.S. public-health policy response to the pandemic. Politicians, it became clear, wanted to stop the spread of science-based dissent from their policies, setting a dangerous new precedent in America. This startling bipartisan effort to shape public debate over such a critical issue shows how the levers of our government have become corrupt, regardless of who holds power.

Zweig presented emails and texts between federal-government officials and Twitter executives, starting in 2020 and continuing until the summer of 2022. Zweig explains: “It wasn’t just Twitter. The meetings with the Trump White House were also attended by Google, Facebook, Microsoft and others.” For example, early in 2020, Trump officials tried to get Twitter to censor accounts that were spreading what they deemed misinformation. Their goal was to prevent fear and thus panic-buying of groceries and basic medical supplies. The effort to use the power of the executive to limit or outright censor dissenting views accelerated upon the election of Joe Biden.

In an astounding abuse of power, the Biden administration actively and directly targeted and tried to suppress debate regarding Covid-19 science, intentionally trying to punish or silence anyone whom they considered a dissenting voice.  This was most prominent with the release of email exchanges between Rob Flaherty, the White House’s director of digital media, and social-media executives. The emails prove definitively that social-media companies, including Facebook and Twitter, were badgered and pressured to restrict free speech and impose Covid censorship policies promoted by high-level officials within the White House.

As has been well documented in the Twitter Files, Flaherty repeatedly, over a period of weeks and months, threatened and cajoled executives at Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, and other sites to dramatically restrict free expression of any individuals that disagreed with the White House stance on coronavirus policy. From the Wall Street Journal:

These emails establish a clear pattern: Mr. Flaherty, representing the White House, expresses anger at the companies’ failure to censor Covid-related content to his satisfaction. The companies change their policies to address his demands. As a result, thousands of Americans were silenced for questioning government-approved Covid narratives. Two of the Missouri plaintiffs, Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, are epidemiologists whom multiple social-media platforms censored at the government’s behest for expressing views that were scientifically well-founded but diverged from the government line—for instance, that children and adults with natural immunity from prior infection don’t need Covid vaccines.

This use of political pressure was not limited to lower-level staffers in the West Wing. White House press secretary Jen Psaki, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, and even President Biden himself directly advocated such censorship. As the WSJ reported, “on July 16, 2021, a reporter asked Mr. Biden his ‘message to platforms like Facebook.’ He replied, ‘They’re killing people.’ Mr. Biden later claimed he meant users, not platforms, were killing people. But the record shows Facebook itself was the target of the White House’s pressure campaign.” From within our federal government came repeated, organized pressure to coerce — possibly illegally — private companies to censor the free speech of Americans whose positions deviated from government-approved messaging. This very well may be the most sustained and organized effort of censorship in modern American history.

And it’s not just inside the Beltway: Last year, the government of California passed a law that prohibits doctors from spreading Covid “misinformation.” Putting aside the downright un-American and authoritarian aspects of this effort to suppress certain views, we arrive at another core problem: What exactly is misinformation? Twitter executives, in cahoots with government officials, deemed certain opinions to be misinformation not because these views were at odds with science but simply because they were at odds with the government narrative.

TOP STORIES
‘Not An Accurate Description’: MSNBC Anchor Chides Reporter for Using ‘Pro-Life’ On-Air
AG Garland Appoints Special Counsel to Investigate Biden’s Alleged Mishandling of Classified Documents
‘Not True!’: Joy Reid Shouts Down Byron Donalds as He Predicts Social-Security Collapse
Stop Electing Lazy, Narcissistic Men-Children to Congress
As a New Batch of Classified Documents Emerges, Assessing Biden’s Statements about the First Batch
Heck of a Morning, Axios!
But we have another major problem regarding misinformation: Government officials have been spreading untrue information for the entirety of the pandemic. This, of course, started under Trump, but Biden and his staff have clearly been involved in their own misinformation campaigns.

The examples are plentiful. The most familiar one, by now, is Covid adviser Anthony Fauci’s misinformation about masks: In early 2020, he proclaimed that people did not need them to protect themselves from the virus. He later admitted that he’d said this because he and other policy-makers were worried about depleting supplies of high-grade masks needed by medical professionals. But that worry doesn’t change the fact that he was actively misinforming the public on the matter.

More on
COVID
 
Woke Shock Troops on Campus
The Adverse Effects of Lying during a Pandemic
White House Pressured Facebook to Censor Tucker Carlson Anti-Vaccine Video
In 2021, current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Rochelle Walensky repeatedly, and on numerous occasions, proclaimed that the Covid vaccines could prevent transmission of the virus. Fauci said this, too. This unscientific misstatement was repeated by President Biden in July 2021. No evidence or data supported such a statement, but the misinformation was disseminated nonetheless. In fact, it was on the basis of this misinformation that the Biden administration pushed for vaccine mandates, even after the claim that vaccines prevent transmission had been disproven.

These are but a few of the examples of government misinformation on Covid, which the American people were asked to accept as “science.” And yet we are expected to excuse those in power for their misstatements.

The pandemic-driven interest in censorship as a tool of government will not simply end with the Biden administration, now that the pandemic has wound down. Once such authoritarian powers become tolerated by the public, their use will spread. There is now a pervasive belief, especially among the American political Left, that the elites controlling the levers of government power have not only a right but a duty to suppress information flowing to the American public. We learned from the Twitter Files, for example, that Congressman Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) used the power of his elected office to suppress the speech of Americans he disagrees with. Journalist Matt Taibbi documented that Schiff demanded that Twitter executives suspend the accounts of various political voices he deemed dangerous.

The arrogance and lack of humility among these leaders is one of the key reasons why skepticism and distrust have been growing among the American people. One cannot call it paranoia when the public, suspecting that its leaders are not being honest, is shown evidence that their leaders were in fact lying.

The Biden administration, from the president on down, owes the American people full transparency, accountability, and public apologies for their behavior. Their un-American suppression of dissent is not only a disgrace in a free country, but it also might have cost lives. The eternal quest for knowledge in science depends on vigorous, open, honest debate carried on freely and without threat of punishment. Debates by their very nature will often reveal certain claims to have been false. That is literally how the scientific method works: eliminating the ideas that are wrong to truly learn what is right.

Donald Trump and his administration certainly started this process early in the pandemic, but their scattershot attempts to restrict messaging pale in comparison to his successor’s attempt at censorship. And in that sense, Biden and his administration continue to fail the American people. Americans should demand that their leaders be held to account for this affront to the First Amendment.

[Crafty_Dog]

Considering contrary POVs is part of the search for Truth:


https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/the-science-and-business-behind-covid?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[DougMacG]

Considering contrary POVs is part of the search for Truth:


https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/the-science-and-business-behind-covid?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

A good article about how misinformation spreads but not much about determining which side's message is misinformation.

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/elon-musk-reveals-major-side-effects-after-2nd-covid-booster_5001304.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2023-01-22&src_cmp=mb-2023-01-22&utm_medium=email&est=LuGdsIKq02xjyuQG%2Bb%2BRbfGt12XAuZa8eumrRkpPsiLK2C3jWIrmlg4r%2BE%2FbNcKhaLC6

[Crafty_Dog]

Looking like Michael Yon was on target , , ,

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/health/joe-rogan-and-bret-weinstein-covid-19-blunder_5004427.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-01-24-2&src_cmp=breaking-2023-01-24-2&utm_medium=email&est=%2FQx6lKwr%2BKKURU1lLm6NNTK0tbqbMdwbqpg%2FTNB%2BwqoMAMZj%2FkbHBSpXlgtXpcetLshP

Joe Rogan and Bret Weinstein: COVID-19 Blunder
An evolutionary theorist dropped this bombshell on Joe Rogan, referring to it as the biggest blunder in human history.
HEALTH VIEWPOINTS
Joseph Mercola
Joseph Mercola
Jan 23 2023
biggersmaller
By Lightspring/Shutterstock
By Lightspring/Shutterstock
An evolutionary theorist dropped this bombshell on Joe Rogan, referring to it as the biggest blunder in human history. Just look at this ‘mind-blowing’ research published in Science Immunology regarding what happens to your immune system after just 3 doses.




STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Bret Weinstein, an evolutionary theorist, discussed some of the most heavily censored topics today on “The Joe Rogan Experience”
From the initial allowance of gain-of-function research to the botched pandemic response, Weinstein believes the COVID-19 pandemic is the largest blunder in human history
Research published in Science Immunology reveals a “mind blowing” finding that after three doses of mRNA COVID-19 shots, your immune system may be triggered not to fight
As SARS-CoV-2 spread through the population, fear was used to make the population compliant
Weinstein explores the possibility that a select group may have had advance notice of the impending pandemic and used that knowledge to position themselves for a financial windfall
Bret Weinstein, an evolutionary theorist, author of “A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” and host of “The DarkHorse Podcast” was interviewed on “The Joe Rogan Experience,” discussing some of the most heavily censored topics today.[1]

From discussing why he believes COVID-19 is the “biggest blunder in human history” to how COVID-19 shots may make the human immune system unable to fight off pathogens, the interview is as riveting as it is pertinent to public health.

At the root of the problem is censorship, which has buried information that could have turned the tide of the COVID-19 pandemic early on, and the intentional act of keeping people in the dark, which may have paved the way for massive wealth transfer ahead of the pandemic.

‘Zero Is a Special Number’
Weinstein begins by discussing how the narrative has been able to get so out of control, with free speech openly dampened by those in control. He calls the concept “zero is a special number”:[2]

“The idea of zero as a special number is that this narrative control would not work if there was even one newspaper that was dedicated to the job of reporting the news. It wouldn’t work if there was even one university that was dedicated to finding what the truth might be. Right?

It doesn’t work if there’s one social media platform in a primary position in which free speech reigns, because in any of these cases, if you had the university that was still interested in truth seeking in an era where everybody else was doing their diversity, equity and inclusion thing, every reasonable person would wanna send their kid there, right?

So it would win in competition almost immediately, and the result would be every other institution would have to change their policy to compete. So if you get even one exception, that’s enough to break this pattern.”

What we face is a corporate stronghold over media combined with a state-run propaganda machine. Countless private-public partnerships between government and corporations bind the two camps together in a pact to dictate “truth” to the public. Weinstein believes Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter is an attempt to become that single exception, which is why you’re seeing so many people publicly announcing that they’re leaving the platform:[3]

Top US Men's Surgeon: Do This Once Daily To 'Shrink' Enlarged Prostate
SPONSORED CONTENT
Top US Men's Surgeon: Do This Once Daily To 'Shrink' Enlarged Prostate
BY PROSTANEWS.COM
“The structure that is controlling the narrative understands that it cannot endure that [Twitter becoming a platform for free speech]. And so far it has failed to shut down Elon.

So their next move is actually to get people on one side of this debate to leave so that they can’t prevent Twitter from being a space where people can speak freely, but they can take it out of the position of being a primary social media environment. And in so doing, they will take the number of meaningful exceptions to the free speech control back to zero. That’s what they’re up to.”

They Don’t Want You to Know the Shots Are Gene Therapy
Initially, Weinstein didn’t think the issue of labeling mRNA COVID-19 shots “vaccines” was a big issue, but he’s since changed his mind. “Lots of people were upset by the redefinition of the term vaccine,” he says. “I wasn’t convinced it was an important issue. I have switched sides on this. I now think the definition is vitally important and we’re beginning to see why.”[4]

The No. 1 reason why Weinstein believes COVID-19 shots are not vaccines is because they do not create immunity to the pathogen. They also use a very different technology than that used by typical vaccines. But if the government began touting a new gene therapy, people would have questioned it. Weinstein explains:[5]

“What they’ve done is they’ve smuggled in a really, truly radically new technology. And they caused us all not to worry about it very much by using the term vaccine, right? If they had said, alright, we’ve got this pandemic and in order to prevent it from spreading, we’re gonna have everybody take gene therapy.

Everybody would’ve said, what? Gene therapy is that safe? So the point is we had a category and it was called vaccine. And we all thought, you know, there are some crazy folks who are worried about vaccines, but in general, it’s safe. So if something carries that label, it’s probably safe too.”

How COVID Shots Made the Pandemic Worse
As Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, an evolutionary biologist and cohost of “The DarkHorse Podcast,” dug deeper, they realized there was no way anyone could know whether COVID-19 shots were safe. “We looked at these technologies and thought, wow, you are intervening in a nested series of complex systems in a way that you can’t possibly predict the outcome.”[6]

This brought them to the work of Geert Vanden Bossche, Ph.D., a vaccinology expert and former global director of vaccine programs, including work for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He’s been heavily censored because he’s among those who have warned about immune escape due to the pressure being placed upon the virus during the mass COVID-19 shot campaign.

Bossche describes a general principle in biology, vaccinology and microbiology that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics, antibodies or chemotherapeutics, for example, but don’t kill them off completely, you can inadvertently encourage their mutation into more virulent strains. Those that escape your immune system end up surviving and selecting mutations to ensure their further survival.

SARS-CoV-2 has a high capacity for mutation but, according to Bossche, if the virus isn’t under pressure, it won’t necessarily see a need to select mutations to, for instance, become more infectious. But if you put it under pressure, as occurred during the mass vaccination campaign — or as Bossche calls it the “one big experiment” — this changes. Weinstein says: [7]

“What he said is, look, if you vaccinate into a pandemic and you do so broadly across the population, you’re going to drive the evolution of variants … You are going to create an evolutionary arms race, and you were going to cause the number of variants to proliferate.

And, you know, at the time, I couldn’t say for sure that he was right, but what I could say was that he was making evolutionary sense. There was nothing terribly complex about his argument, and it was robust. And I think now we are seeing … that proliferation of variants.”

Are the Shots Triggering Immune Systems to Give Up?
Research published in Science Immunology [8] reveals a “mind blowing” finding that after three doses of mRNA COVID-19 shots, your immune system may be triggered not to fight. “It’s a very dangerous discovery,” Weinstein says, that has to do with an elevation in the percentage of IgG4 antibodies:[9]

“IgG4 is actually part of a system in which the body attenuates its own response to an antigen. So the mind blowing, and you know, it’s an early result, maybe it doesn’t get replicated, but … the implication is that the evolutionary path we have traveled is causing the pathogen now to be able to trigger a response that will cause the immune system not to fight. Nobody knows what happens next …

So the idea that a pathogen, and mind you, not a normal pathogen, a pathogen that we can now be pretty darn certain was engineered by humans, at least in part, that pathogen is now triggering that signal that causes the immune system not to react anymore, means we’re in a whole new landscape.”

Another potential mechanism of harm involves Marc Girardot’s Bolus Theory [10] and what happens if a COVID-19 shot, or any shot which is intended to be injected into the muscle, accidentally gets injected into a blood vessel, a demonstrated regular occurrence in hospitals. According to Girardot: [11]

“Say the direct IV injection of a dose of Pfizer [COVID-19 shot] is diluted by 30 by the time it gets to the aorta, you’d have around 10,000 lipid nanoparticles hitting each square millimeter of endothelium during the very brief passage of the bolus.

Let’s imagine 10% of these vaccine particles penetrate a cell when they hit it. That means that up to 1,000 cells will end up destroyed by the immune system. That’s more than 100% of the cells in that area! Likely irreparable, similar to a third-degree burn.

In the case of a proper intramuscular injection, the maximum concentration would be 25 lipid nanoparticles presenting themselves to the same 1 sq.mm. of endothelial surface. Only three would be uptaken, or less 0.4% of the surface would end up destroyed. Those three cell gaps would be fixed within minutes of the immune attack. And life would go on.

This brief physical phenomenon, similar to an avalanche crashing through your vascular system, is in my opinion the cause of all the adverse effects we have witnessed these past two years, and that have occurred for decades.”

More Clues SARS-CoV-2 Is Not of Natural Origin
Weinstein says he knew very early on in the pandemic that SARS-CoV-2 did not appear to be of natural origin. Further, it didn’t appear to be due to a simple laboratory escape either, but rather was a highly unusual pathogen with “unprecedented genetic alteration” — one that was likely enhanced in a laboratory before it escaped. Even the way it behaves in the human body, harming everything from toes to circulation to the brain is unusual:[12]

“There’s a reason that a normal pathogen doesn’t do the widescale damage that COVID seems to, and that reason is that, in general, pathogens don’t have an interest in harming you … In fact, they do best when you are healthy enough to walk around and spread them.

And so they tend to spare tissues that do not help them to be transmitted. Well, that’s not the case with this pathogen. This pathogen seems to invade all kinds of tissues that don’t help it to spread.”

The presence of a furin cleavage site on SARS-CoV-2, which is what makes it so transmissible and able to invade tissue so effectively, is another smoking gun. “That’s something that we knew would take a coronavirus and cause it to be highly effective in humans. We knew that before SARS-CoV-2 ever emerged. So, to find it on this virus, even though no other member of the subfamily has it, is conspicuous,” he says.[13]

The lengths that the mainstream narrative has gone to discredit the lab-origin theory also hint at its relevance: [14]

“Why are they continually trying to reanimate the explanation that this is a natural spillover event? Because if it isn’t, then we know who did it, right? Anthony Fauci was key to circumventing the ban on gain-of-function research that resulted in the Wuhan lab being funded by us [the U.S.] to do this work. So if this was a natural spillover event from a wet market, then Anthony Fauci is in the clear, right?

If this is the result of ill-conceived gain-of-function research taking place in Wuhan, partially at our direction, that’s a whole different ballgame … those who are responsible cannot allow a full investigation.

I don’t know what will happen if the truth were to fully emerge about, not only what was the explanation for how this virus came into the world when it came into the world … but also what we failed to do, … we failed to deploy …

Because we didn’t deal with the pathogen properly at the beginning, because we didn’t deploy the drugs that we had at our disposal that did work, we ran out the clock on the brief period of time when we might have driven it extinct or at least controlled it.”

The Largest Blunder in Human History
From the initial allowance of gain-of-function research to the botched pandemic response, Weinstein believes the COVID-19 pandemic is the largest blunder in human history. He asks poignant questions, like what would have happened if we had treated COVID-19 the way we treat other emerging pathogens — with trial and error and open discussion until the best course of treatment is identified.

“[If] we just let doctors figure out how to treat it … they would’ve gotten rapidly better at treating this disease, and they would’ve discovered all of the compounds that work. And they would’ve talked to each other about in what way to deploy those compounds, at what dosage. They would’ve discovered all of that stuff,” Weinstein says. [15]

Instead, as SARS-CoV-2 spread through the population, fear was used to make the population compliant. Data was manipulated, with COVID-19 deaths including people who died “with” COVID, not from it.

“Those numbers caused us to think the pathogen was something other than it was. And it is obvious to anyone seriously analyzing this that COVID isn’t a dangerous pathogen. SARS-CoV-2 is a dangerous pathogen. I’m very worried about where it goes. But the case fatality rate is not one that should have caused us to vaccinate literally billions of people,” Weinstein explains. [16]

A tweet featured in the interview claimed to be from a doctor who defended her choice to get a COVID-19 shot, saying she did it out of love while antivaxxers were acting out of hate. The tweet turned out to be fake, [17] but its sentiment was not a far stretch from reality, as friends, families and colleagues have been torn apart over differing viewpoints during the pandemic.

This divisiveness is not happenstance; it’s very much intentional. “One of the best ways to not look at people as being human is to categorize them as an enemy in some way,” Weinstein says, mentioning mass formation, which involves the formation of a hypnotic state around a shared consensus.

“The mass formation appears to be downstream of an industrial strength propaganda campaign,” Weinstein says. “A very expensive one designed to create these unsolvable puzzles for people so that they would end up in this mindset.” [18]

The solution begins with continuing to share and spread the truth, and coming together toward this end. “If we don’t do that, then we head into further and further polarization.” [19]

Who’s Profiting Off Keeping You in the Dark?
Meanwhile, Weinstein explores the possibility that a select group may have had advance notice of the impending pandemic and used that knowledge to position themselves for a financial windfall — and a “cryptic, massive transfer of wealth: [20]

“There’s been lots of talk in various publications at this point about the possibility that COVID was circulating earlier than we knew … If you know that a pandemic is coming and that it is going to spread around the globe, and it is going to cause all kinds of alterations, you can, you know, short stocks for cruise ships or airplanes, hotels, right? You can invest in pharmaceutical companies that have useful technologies …

And so the question is, how much of the story here involves something having understood what was coming and having revealed it at a point that it was positioned rather than it having emerged naturally? … I’m as much an outsider to this as anybody, but I will say there’s a version of the story in which our being kept in the dark is a perpetual source of wealth.”

Originally published Jan 20, 2023, on Mercola.com

References
[1] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023

[2] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 17:16

[3] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 18:14

[4] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 19:53

[5] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 22:55

[6] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 25:46

[7] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 22:55

[8] Science Immunology December 22, 2022

[9] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 28:36

[10] Substack, COVID Myth Buster Series January 9, 2023

[11] Substack, COVID Myth Buster Series January 9, 2023

[12] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 36:00

[13] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 39:20

[14] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 47:00

[15] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 1:14

[16] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 1:17

[17] The New York Post January 6, 2023

[18] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 1:40

[19] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 1:49

[20] The Joe Rogan Experience Video January 5, 2023, 1:25

[ccp]

I would argue the biggest blunder was the covid 19  escape from the Wuhan lab in the first place.

if the vaccinations were disarming the immune system
then it would be the first time I ever heard of this in history.

so I think the word "blunder" which is thrill for the anti vaxers
is an unfair adjective that just makes anti vaxers feel good

"I was right all along " and "YOU were/are  wrong " mentality

which comes from both sides of the issue
all one upmanship
instead we are all in this together
learning along the way

[Crafty_Dog]

a) If I have it right, the argument is that these were not vaccinations, but something of an entirely different nature;

b) I would submit that the attitude of the anti-vaxxers here is driven by the quasi-totalitarian (quite possibly driven in corrupt motivations) suppression of scientific inquiry and other points of view, the financial ruin created by the cancelation of those of the other points of view.  The vaxx forces most certainly were NOT of the we-are-all-in-this-together mindset.

[ccp]

there is historical evidence

that in 1918 - 19
cities that had quarantine did a lot better in preventing deaths than those that did not.

I believe the medical community thought then logically they need to do same here
 to prevent
spread and death

the pros and cons did not turn out as expected
(that might  have worked in past to some degree )

the virus is too easily spread ,
and people are just too interconnected to stop the spread and the vaccines are very disappointing in they do not stop spread
mask do not work well
it turns out

To stop a contagion like this you need all in
was the thinking

it turns out with this contagion
this approach does not work and is counter productive

in retrospect

were lives saved ?
I don't know anymore
I am tired of data - one person dies it is a tragedy
if a million die it is a statistic .....

[Crafty_Dog]

As far as the beginning is concerned, we are in agreement that the official thinking was plausible, the problem is in the cross connection with the WHO and the Chi Coms and the apparent insider dealing with the Pharmas AND THE OPPRESSION OF OTHER POINTS OF VIEW AND THE FAILURE TO CHANGE COURSE AS KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS EVOLVED.

[G M]

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/125/686/979/original/a515e5cbb51aa213.jpg

there is historical evidence

that in 1918 - 19
cities that had quarantine did a lot better in preventing deaths than those that did not.

I believe the medical community thought then logically they need to do same here
 to prevent
spread and death

the pros and cons did not turn out as expected
(that might  have worked in past to some degree )

the virus is too easily spread ,
and people are just too interconnected to stop the spread and the vaccines are very disappointing in they do not stop spread
mask do not work well
it turns out

To stop a contagion like this you need all in
was the thinking

it turns out with this contagion
this approach does not work and is counter productive

in retrospect

were lives saved ?
I don't know anymore
I am tired of data - one person dies it is a tragedy
if a million die it is a statistic .....

[Crafty_Dog]

Mask-Wearing Champions Japan and South Korea Look to End the Habit
‘We want to restore normalcy,’ says Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida

In Japan, social pressure to wear masks remains strong even as business has returned to nearly normal.
PHOTO: ISSEI KATO/REUTERS
By Miho InadaFollow
 in Tokyo and Dasl YoonFollow
 in Seoul
Jan. 20, 2023 6:42 am ET

Three years into the pandemic, nearly everyone in Japan is wearing a mask most of the time in public, and in South Korea it is legally required indoors.

Now these two Asian champions of mask-wearing say it is time to move on. Officials in Tokyo and Seoul on Friday called for easing of mask protocols, overriding concerns from some who say the practice still saves lives and keeps away a variety of ailments.

It is a striking cultural divide with the U.S. and European nations, where most people long ago gave up their masks and the political debate was often driven by people who objected to face-covering.

In Japan and South Korea, antimask sentiment has had little political currency. Tokyo even had to run ads last summer urging people to take off their masks outside to avoid heat stroke.

Chiharu Kanki, a 58-year-old teacher in Japan who double-masks in public, said the habit has protected her not only from Covid-19 but also from colds and hay-fever symptoms over the past three years. “My eyes didn’t itch even once,” she said. “I’m just scared to take off my mask.”

Still, some critics have raised concerns recently that permanent masking is unhealthy for society.

“Children have been deprived of freedom most,” said political scientist Lully Miura. She said that at her daughter’s elementary school, students have to wear masks all day including when singing in chorus. The exceptions are gym class and lunch, when she said the children have to eat silently.

“They are put in a position where they can’t enjoy life,” she said.

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Friday called on government officials to prepare for easing guidance that currently recommends mask-wearing indoors. “We want to restore normalcy in Japan,” he said.

He also said the government would prepare to downgrade Covid-19 to a lower-risk category of diseases that includes influenza. Currently, it is rated high-risk along with pneumonia.


Japan has never legally mandated mask wearing, but it is effectively required in many settings.
PHOTO: KYODONEWS/ZUMA PRESS

South Korea said it would lift its indoor-mask mandate starting Jan. 30, citing a downward trend in infections. It had dropped the mandate for outdoors last September. People will still be required to wear masks at hospitals and pharmacies and while using public transportation.

South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo said infections and critical Covid-19 cases were falling, allowing for looser rules.

The move enjoys popular support. In a December poll by the Korea Chamber of Commerce of Industry, three of four South Koreans said they wanted the indoor-mask mandate lifted. Most people have already stopped wearing masks outside.

In Japan, by contrast, it is too early to say whether an all-clear signal from the government will change public behavior.

An internet poll conducted in December by survey firm MyVoice found nearly 80% of Japanese respondents wanted to wear masks either all the time or in some situations even after the pandemic is over.

While business has returned to virtually normal in Japan and the country’s borders have been fully open to travel since October, social pressure to wear masks remains strong.

On a recent morning show on public broadcaster NHK about soba noodles, a reporter slurped some noodles on camera but quickly put his mask back on before commenting on the taste.

At Ginza Mitsukoshi, a department store in Tokyo operated by Isetan Mitsukoshi Holdings Ltd. often visited by tourists, the symbolic lion statue at the entrance still bears a huge mask. The company said it hoped customers would follow suit.


South Korea said it would lift its indoor-mask mandate at the end of January, citing a downward trend in infections.
PHOTO: WOOHAE CHO/BLOOMBERG NEWS

In contrast to South Korea, Japan has never legally mandated mask wearing, but it is effectively required in many settings.

A professional player of shogi, or Japanese chess, removed his mask at an October match and forgot to put it back on. Match officials, citing a mask requirement, said he had to forfeit the match, and the Japan Shogi Association this month upheld the decision on appeal.

Asian nations generally weathered the pandemic better than the U.S., but the role of masks is still debated. The Covid-19 death rate per capita for Japan is one-sixth the U.S. level, while South Korea’s is one-fifth the U.S. level, according to the website Our World in Data.

Norio Sugaya, an infectious-diseases expert and a visiting professor at Keio University in Tokyo, said it was too early for the government to encourage people to go maskless. He observed that more than 10,000 people in Japan have died of Covid-19 in the past month, which is two to three times the typical number of flu deaths annually in the country. That means Covid-19 shouldn’t be downgraded to the same category as the flu, he said.

Other specialists, however, say masks also carry long-term risks. Masami Yamaguchi, a psychology professor at Chuo University in Tokyo, said that many teenage girls who are accustomed to masks don’t want to show their faces and that in some cases, dating couples have never seen each other’s unmasked face. Even babies might suffer disruption in their ability to recognize faces, she said, a subject she is researching now.

“We cannot see an obvious impact, but it could emerge in 10 or 20 years,” she said.

Write to Miho Inada at miho.inada@wsj.com and Dasl Yoon at dasl.yoon@wsj.com

[G M]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywlpArNWKxM

Controlled evolution!

[G M]

https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/image00000933.jpg

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/125/686/979/original/a515e5cbb51aa213.jpg

there is historical evidence

that in 1918 - 19
cities that had quarantine did a lot better in preventing deaths than those that did not.

I believe the medical community thought then logically they need to do same here
 to prevent
spread and death

the pros and cons did not turn out as expected
(that might  have worked in past to some degree )

the virus is too easily spread ,
and people are just too interconnected to stop the spread and the vaccines are very disappointing in they do not stop spread
mask do not work well
it turns out

To stop a contagion like this you need all in
was the thinking

it turns out with this contagion
this approach does not work and is counter productive

in retrospect

were lives saved ?
I don't know anymore
I am tired of data - one person dies it is a tragedy
if a million die it is a statistic .....

[G M]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywlpArNWKxM

Controlled evolution!

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/directed-evolution-pfizer-rd-exec-says-covid-19-created-wuhan-cash-cow-company

[Crafty_Dog]

I suppose I get the logic of wanting to be ready, but OTOH "Intelligence is the amount of time it takes to forget a lesson."

[G M]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11687675/Army-spied-lockdown-critics-Sceptics-including-Peter-Hitchens-suspected-watched.html

Good thing we have a constitution!

https://nationalpost.com/news/what-the-twitter-files-reveal-about-the-platforms-relationship-with-the-fbi

[Crafty_Dog]

Please post those two in Surveillance State as well.

[G M]

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/3441999/dr-obvious

[G M]

https://www.eugyppius.com/p/about-that-project-veritas-scoop

[G M]

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/bill-gates-profits-biontech-effectiveness-covid-vaccines/

[ccp]

unless people are f'ing and s'ing on airplanes and in restaurants

not an issue with transmission

duh

[G M]

https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/1620193873875320834

[ccp]

sounds to me they are altering virus

don't they claim they are forced to or have no choice?

who is telling them to do this
FDA ?
NIH ?
other ?

we should not be messing with natural viruses

is not corona not enough evidence the danger is greater than any benefit ?

supposedly this is being done around the world I read somewhere

you know China from what I read never does anything without military input .

[G M]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/01/vaccinated-msnbc-host-reveals-developed-pericarditis-myocarditis-due-common-cold-video/

 

[G M]

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2023/01/31/its-time-for-the-scientific-community-to-admit-we-were-wrong-about-covid-it-cost-lives/

[G M]

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2023/02/01/who-will-be-spared-from-covid-19-vaccine-injury/#more-292843

[ccp]

remember when Trump pushed to get vaccine ASAP
and most in the med community at first said it would take a yr and half to be sure it is safe and ready

then it came out in a yr

so it is rightly called the *Trump vaccine*

"Americans have become numb with newsreels of sudden cardiac death, blood clots, stroke, seizures, hospitalization, and death after COVID-19 vaccination.

[me , not really ]

Many have vowed to decline future boosters and get off the vaccination train. However, a common question is:  will I be spared?

[me , not losing sleep ]

in response the the daily
"clot shot" post

even right wing fav Bhattachayria finally admitted shots for those 65 and older or at high risk "work"

Finally admitted that despite yrs of only bashing

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.newsweek.com/its-time-scientific-community-admit-we-were-wrong-about-coivd-it-cost-lives-opinion-1776630

[G M]

https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/01/read-autopsy-analysis-of-2-teen-boys-who-died-days-after-2d-pfizer-covid-19-shot/

[ccp]

" clotshot " = "Trump vaccine"

 

[Crafty_Dog]

https://dailycaller.com/2023/02/02/west-point-travel-cadet-vaccine-mandate/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking&pnespid=p6t4VXROMrMGxOOcpTa.Q8zXpBmgUop0J7K30Ogwt0Zm1A6dcVi1jQnQw7BQVz7tl6R7MTPe

[G M]

" clotshot " = "Trump vaccine"

 

Yes.

As the narrative shifts from “safe and effective” to “Oh my god, what did we do?” Then it will be Trump’s vaccine!

[ccp]

well Trump pushed it out faster then most wanted to do so

so it fits

more "data " for you :

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00320-6/fulltext

https://www.statnews.com/2022/12/13/covid-vaccines-prevented-3-million-deaths/