National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC): ACIP Recommends RSV Vaccination for Pregnant Women

ACIP Recommends RSV Vaccination for Pregnant Women

By Theresa Wrangham
Published September 28, 2023 in Government
SEE: https://www.nvic.org/newsletter/sept-2023/acip-recommends-rsv-for-pregnant-women;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.



Pfizer’s Abrysvo Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) vaccine was recommended by the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on Friday, Sept. 22, 2023. The recommendation is to administer the vaccine only during the RSV season of September through January in pregnant women at 32 to 36 weeks of gestation. Abrysvo was approved in August for use in pregnant women to prevent RSV in infants by the FDA.1

The ACIP also approved the use of taxpayer dollars in the Vaccines for Children Fund (VFC) for Abrysvo so that the vaccine may be administered “free of charge” in many settings. The CDC is expected to accept the ACIP’s recommendation and add this vaccine to the adult schedule.

The ACIP also stated that generally, infants born to mothers who had been vaccinated for Abrysvo should not receive the newly recommended RSV monoclonal antibody nirsevimab, known as Beyfortus. This statement would seem to fly in the face of ACIP’s lack of concern in August regarding vaccine coadministration, which was justified by the committee noting that nirsevimab was a drug and not a vaccine.2

Yet Another Pricey RSV Intervention Expensive RSV Interventions

One constant for the ACIP was their continued unhappiness with the price tag for  RSV interventions. The nirsevimab RSV monoclonal antibody costs $395-$495 per dose3 and Abrysvo RSV vaccine costs  $295 per dose. When questioned by the committee about pricing outside the U.S., Pfizer didn’t provide specifics and instead stated that a tiered pricing strategy based on estimated affordability is used. 

Notably, the vaccine and monoclonal antibody offer limited protection to infants from RSV - about six months.4 5 6

RSV Vaccination Timing Hoped to Curtail Premature Births

Shifting the vaccination window to 32-36 weeks into a pregnancy is later than the clinical trial window considered by the FDA. Tables comparing outcomes for vaccines administered at 24-31 weeks vs. 32-36 weeks appeared to decrease preterm births. However, due to fewer study subjects, the data is likely to be underpowered, and real-world results for premature births in RSV-vaccinated women could differ. Notably, this clinical trial data reflects outcomes for only healthy, low-risk pregnancies.

Clinical Trail Data and Adverse Vaccine Events to be Monitored Pregancy & Vaccines

Vaccine safety monitoring for Abrysvo vaccine adverse events will be done through the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink, the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and V-safe.

A higher rate of Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), a rare but serious neurological disorder that causes inflammation of the peripheral nerves,7 was reported among individuals who received the vaccine in clinical trials for Abrysvo. There was also a higher rate of atrial fibrillation, a serious heart disorder that may lead to complications such as stroke, heart attack, or heart failure,8 among vaccine recipients.9

In pregnant women clinical trials also revealed higher rates of preterm deliveries, as well as higher rates of pre-eclampsia, a complication of pregnancy with symptoms that include high blood pressure, swelling of the hands and feet, and protein in the urine and gestational hypertension, in women vaccinated with Abrysvo versus those not vaccinated.10

Conditions to be monitored include many neurologic, neuroinflammatory, and cardiac conditions such as GBS, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM), multiple sclerosis, meningitis, transverse myelitis (TM), chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), atrial fibrillation, and supraventricular tachycardias (SVT).

Pregnancy Vaccination Recommendations Increase as Flu Season is Rebranded

Abrysvo is the fourth vaccine to be recommended for use by the ACIP. Adverse event reports submitted for Abrysvo could also potentially be in connection with the coadministration of COVID-19, influenza, and TdaP vaccines.11

As seasonal COVID-19, influenza, and RSV vaccines are rolled out, what has previously been marketed as flu season has been rebranded as respiratory season to harmonize the push for the uptake of these seasonal vaccines.12

Vaccine Injury Compensation and RSV

The ACIP’s recommendation of Abrysvo RSV vaccine for pregnant women is one of the steps required before the vaccine is covered by the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).13

Last month, the ACIP approved the drug nirsevimab, as if it were a vaccine and it too may eventually be covered by the VICP.14

About RSV & RSV Vaccine ill infant

RSV is a common and highly contagious respiratory virus that produces cold symptoms such as coughing, sneezing, wheezing, decreased appetite, and fever. Most people who become infected with RSV will recover fully within a week or two without treatment.15

Young infants and children, older adults, and individuals with immune system disorders and chronic health conditions are at an increased risk of RSV infection and may also be at an elevated risk of developing complications from the illness.16 Complications of RSV infection include inflammation of the small airways within the lungs (bronchiolitis) and lung infection (pneumonia) and may require hospitalization for supportive care.17

To learn more about RSV and RSV vaccines and their complications and risks, visit NVIC’s RSV web pages.

References:

1 U.S. Food & Drug Administration. FDA Approves First Vaccine for Pregnant Individuals to Prevent RSV in Infants.

2 Wrangham T. Vote to Add Drug to Childhood Vaccination Schedule Opens Door to Daycare Mandates, Tracking, and Injury Liability Shield. National Vaccine Information Center Aug. 10, 2023.

3 Wrangham T. Vote to Add Drug to Childhood Vaccination Schedule Opens Door to Daycare Mandates, Tracking, and Injury Liability Shield. National Vaccine Information Center Aug. 10, 2023.

4 Ortega-Sanches IR. ACIP Presentation - Economics of Vaccinating U.S. Adults ≥60 years old against Respiratory Syncytial Virus. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Feb 23, 2023.

5 Armstrong M. Nirsevimab data leave the door open for Pfizer. Evaluate Vantage Mar. 3, 2022.

6 Griffin MP, Yuan Y, Takas T, et al. Single-Dose Nirsevimab for Prevention of RSV in Preterm Infants. N Engl J Med. Jul 30, 2020; 383(5):415-425.

7 Wrangham T. ACIP: 2018-2019 Flu Vaccine 44 Percent Effective. National Vaccine Information Center Apr. 7, 2019.

8 NIH National Library of Medicine. Atrial Fibrillation. MedlinePlus Aug. 22, 2023.

9 US Food and Drug Administration. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee February 28 - March 1, 2023 Meeting Briefing Document- FDA: Applicant- GSK. March 1, 2023.

10 Pfizer. Bivalent RSV Prefusion F Vaccine for Maternal Immunization to Protect Infants. Presentation to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting. May 18, 2023.

11 U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. Vaccines During and After Pregnancy. Nov. 9, 2021.

12 U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. Respiratory Disease Season Outlook. Sept. 14, 2023.

13 U.S. Health Resources & Services Administration. Email Correspondence - EUA Vaccines and VICP. National Vaccine Information Center Aug. 24-30, 2021.

14 Wrangham T. Vote to Add Drug to Childhood Vaccination Schedule Opens Door to Daycare Mandates, Tracking, and Injury Liability Shield. National Vaccine Information Center Aug. 10, 2023.

15 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Symptoms and Care. Aug. 16, 2023.

16 Jha A, Jarvis H, Fraser C, et al. Respiratory Syncytial Virus. June 1, 2016.

17 US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. RSV in Infants and Young Children. Aug. 4, 2023.

Fauci Had Secret Meeting With The CIA Regarding COVID-19 Origins

Fauci ​​Had Secret Meeting With The CIA Regarding COVID-19 Origins

Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci looks on during the daily briefing on the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House on April 1, 2020, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

OAN’s Elizabeth Volberding
1:05 PM – Tuesday, September 27, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/fauci-had-secret-meeting-with-the-cia-regarding-covid-19-origins/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Anthony Fauci, the former chief White House medical advisor, secretly visited the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters to “influence” the outcome of the agency’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19 during the pandemic, according to the Republican chairman of the House coronavirus panel.

Representative Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), the head of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, uncovered “concerning information” that was retrieved through his panel in a letter he sent to the Inspector General (IG) of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Christi Grimm.

On Tuesday, the letter was publicized.

Allegedly, the letter “lends credence to heightened concerns about the promotion of a false COVID-19 origins narrative by multiple federal government agencies.” 

“According to information gathered by the Select Subcommittee, Dr. Anthony Fauci, then-director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, played a role in the Central Intelligence Agency’s review of the origins of COVID-19,” Wenstrup wrote. “The information provided suggests that Dr. Fauci was escorted into CIA Headquarters — without a record of entry — and participated in the analysis to ‘influence’ the Agency’s review. Our goal is to ensure the scientific investigative process regarding the origins of COVID-19 was fair, impartial, and free of alternative influence.”

It remains unknown who revealed the information to the subcommittee. However, the letter references one individual, Special Agent Brett Rowland, and requests that the IG make him available for a “voluntary transcribed interview.”

The specific date of Fauci’s undisclosed visit to the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, was not mentioned in Wenstrup’s letter to Grimm.

“The American people deserve the truth — to know the origins of the virus and whether there was a concerted effort by public health authorities to suppress the lab leak theory for political or national security purposes,” Wenstrup announced in a statement, requesting information related to the “movements of Dr. Fauci throughout the pandemic.”

“In addition to these documents, we request you make HHS Special Agent Brett Rowland available for a voluntary transcribed interview at a date to be determined,” Wenstrup said. 

Wenstrup searched for documents and communications between the HHS, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and the U.S. Marshals Service. The sought-after documents were reportedly meant to protect Fauci, and its information also pertains to the former White House coronavirus czar’s admittance or entry into any CIA-owned, operated, or occupied buildings. 

“This allegation is the latest distraction put forth by House Republicans after months wasting taxpayer dollars on seemingly endless conspiracy theories, all while failing to produce any new evidence related to the origins of COVID-19,” a spokesperson for the HHS told Newsweek via email.

In February, reports stated by the Department of Energy and FBI explained that the virus most likely stemmed from a lab leak at Wuhan. However, Fauci, 82, strongly advised that the lab leak theory was “inaccurate.”

“You have to look at the data. I don’t see any data for a lab leak,” Fauci stated. “That doesn’t mean it could not have happened, and that’s the reason I always keep an open mind about that.”

A document request from the coronavirus subcommittee, with an October 10th deadline, requests the following.

  • Any documents authorizing, supporting, or affiliated with Fauci’s claimed movements into any CIA-owned, operated, or occupied buildings between January 1st, 2020, and December 31st, 2022.
  • Any documents and communications between or among contractors and employees of Health and HHS and the IG regarding Fauci’s whereabouts as it pertains to the CIA.
  • Any documents and communications between or among contractors and employees of HHS and the IG and employees or contractors of the U.S. Marshals Service regarding Fauci and the CIA entry.
  • Any documents and communications between or among contractors and employees of HHS and the IG and employees or contractors of the NIH and NIAID.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

Fauci Has $11.5 Million Net Worth After Leaving Government Position

Fauci Has $11.5 MILLION Net Worth After Leaving Government Position

WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 11: Director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci testifies during a hearing before the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies of House Appropriations Committee at Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill May 11, 2022 in Washington, DC. The subcommittee held a hearing to examine the FY 2023 budget request for the National Institutes of Health. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci testifies during a hearing before the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies of House Appropriations Committee at Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill May 11, 2022 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

OAN’s James Meyers
3:07 PM – Tuesday, September 19, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/fauci-has-11m-net-worth-after-leaving-government-position/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

A new report revealed that Dr. Anthony Fauci and his wife, Christine Grady, have a net worth of at least $11 million after he recently stepped down as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). 

According to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) termination report obtained by Fox News, it showed that the married couple are now holding $11.5 million in assets. 

The wealth comes from “awards, federal compensation increases, royalties, and mutual fund investments,” he claims.

However, Fauci previously asserted that he donates all of his royalties to charity. 

During his tenure as chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden and as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force under 45th President Donald Trump, Fauci made more money than both presidents.

He was also the highest-paid federal employee during the COVID-19 pandemic and retired with a salary of almost $481,000 a year, according to Fox.

Additionally, an investigation by the taxpayer watchdog OpenTheBooks.com found that the married couple received a net worth increase of $5 million between January 2019 and December 2021, which was up from $7.5 million. 

In 2021, Fauci was handed $1 million from at least one nonprofit, the Dan David Foundation, for “speaking truth to power” and “defending science” under Trump.

“Despite being viewed as a lifelong public servant, Dr. Fauci and his wife Christine Grady — who still remains among NIH leadership today — managed to become decamillionaires,” OpenTheBooks CEO Adam Andrzejewski told The New York Post.

“It came through a mix of decades-long tenure and special assignments that added to Fauci’s salary, as well as awards, payments, and perks from private entities,” he said. “Even though Fauci left his federal position, taxpayers funded and guaranteed a lifetime pension payout that we estimate rivals the president’s salary.”

Recently, Fauci joined the staff at Georgetown University, taking on a professor position at the Infectious Diseases Division in its School of Medicine.

“This is a natural extension of my scientific, clinical, and public health career, which was initially grounded from my high school and college days where I was exposed to intellectual rigor, integrity, and service-mindedness of Jesuit institutions,” Fauci said in a June press release.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

Here’s Why You May Want to Think Twice Before Getting the Updated COVID Vaccine

Here's Why You May Want to Think Twice Before Getting the Updated COVID Vaccine
AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File
There’s an election coming up next year, so naturally, we’re all being conditioned for a return of COVID-19. For weeks, there’s been talk of a new COVID variant, which prompted Joe Biden to request more funding for Big Pharma a new, updated vaccine. Conveniently enough, at the same time, the media started reporting on the alleged increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations, and some high-profile people suddenly caught COVID, including Jill Biden.

The message was clear: be afraid of the return of COVID. Be very afraid.

But is that really what you should be afraid of? As you may recall, during the pandemic, we learned that the vaccines didn’t necessarily protect people from COVID-19, prompting widespread skepticism. Heck, the CDC even changed the definition of vaccine to remove references to immunity. Even though you may have decided that you weren’t going to get this updated vaccine, Biden floated the idea of a new vaccine mandate.

It seems likely that the Biden administration will do whatever it can to ensure demand for this updated vaccine, which has already been approved by the FDA for all Americans six months and older. According to Johns Hopkins professor Dr. Marty Makary, this new vaccine was approved by the FDA despite any human trial data.

Related: Is This Why We’re Being Conditioned for a COVID Comeback?

“They are telling every American six months of age and older to get this new COVID vaccine, but they approved it based on almost no data,” Makary told Guy Benson on his radio show. “There’s no human clinical trial data. Pfizer submitted data on ten mice, and Moderna, which also got a new vaccine approved [sic]. This is not an additional booster. This is an entirely newly designed COVID-19 vaccine they want everyone to get, even if you had COVID a few months ago. They don’t care. They’re pushing it hard.”

Even worse, the Biden administration appears ready to push this untested vaccine on children, who, we’ve pointed out many times, aren’t really at risk from COVID.

“And the White House bought four times as many doses for children this round as they did last fall when they had that new Bivalent vaccine. So this is a big push now of the Moderna trial. It turns out if you actually look at the data returned, they [Moderna] did give it to 50 people back four months ago. One of them had an adverse event requiring medical attention.”

So Pfizer has no human trial data for its new vaccine, and Moderna is being mum about the adverse effects of its new vaccine. How can they get away with this? Well, as Makary pointed out, they’ve gamed the system before.

Related: Biden Can Shove His New Vaccine Mandate up His Donkey

“They know that the regulatory process to get this approved is totally greased,” Makary pointed out. “President Biden was out there saying that this thing works and everyone needs to get it before the FDA even, you know, approved it. So this thing was greased.”

Imagine a vaccine where 1 in 50 doses resulted in an adverse effect. That’s the kind of result that, in the past, would guarantee rejection from the FDA. Heck, the Biden administration put a pause on the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine over a one-in-a-million risk of blood clots. Consider the evidence, and ask yourself why the Biden administration is pushing you to get an updated vaccine that hasn’t been thoroughly tested to protect yourself from a virus that isn’t nearly as severe as it was two years ago.

Federal Court Sides With Doctors on Ivermectin Lawsuit Charging FDA Overreach

Ivermectin antiparisitic drug

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has given new life to a lawsuit brought by three doctors claiming the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) overstepped its authority and acted as a medical doctor rather than as a regulating authority in the agency’s campaign promoting a ban on the use of the drug Ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.1

The court’s decision overturned U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown’s lower court’s order dismissing the doctors’ lawsuit. Judge Brown agreed with the government that it was protected from the lawsuit due to sovereign immunity.2 Sovereign immunity provides that the government may not be sued without its consent. The purpose behind the legal doctrine of sovereign immunity is to protect the government from being forced to change policies should someone disagree with them and bring legal action.3

The medical doctors, Mary Bowden, Paul Marik, and Robert Apter, argue that the FDA’s actions of interfering with their prescribing of Ivermectin harmed their reputation caused punitive action to be taken against them, and interfered with the practice of medicine, which included pharmacies failing to fill their prescription orders for Ivermectin.

Jared Kalson, the lawyer for the plaintiffs argued:

If the government is going to label Ivermectin a horse medicine or a horse dewormer and promulgate the idea that it is only for animals, then the natural correlation is that doctors who prescribe it are horse doctors or quack doctors, which has played out. The government engaged in a singularly effective campaign here to malign a common drug that has been used for a very long time and has been dispensed in billions of doses. Its one of the most famously safe drugs in the history of human medicine. And when people did exactly what the FDA said to Stop it. Stop it with the Ivermectin,I dont understand how that would not be traceable back to the FDA.4

Court Rules “FDA Not a Physician”

The plaintiffs appealed the lower court order to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The panel of three appellate judges, including Judge Don Willet, Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, and Judge Edith Brown Clement agreed with the plaintiffs that the FDA committed government agency overreach and allowed the doctors to proceed with their lawsuit.5

The Order read,:

FDA is not a physician. It has authority to inform, announce, and apprise—but not to endorse, denounce, or advise. The doctors have plausibly alleged that FDAs posts fell on the wrong side of the line between telling about and telling to. As such, the doctors can use the APA to assert their ultra vires claims against the agencies and the officials.6

Judge Willet took issue with the FDA’s Aug. 21, 2021 Twitter post stating, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” The judge wrote, “Even tweet-sized doses of personalized medical advice are beyond FDA’s statutory authority.”7

How a Licensed Inexpensive Antiparasitic Drug Helped Treat COVID

Merck originally marketed Ivermectin, which was licensed in 1981, as a veterinary antiparasitic drug. By the late 1980s, Ivermectin became the most widely used antiparasitic drug in both animals and humans and has been especially useful in Africa to effectively and safely control malaria.8 9 A Nobel prize-winning drug, doctors have been prescribing Ivermectin to patients for decades.10

So how did a cheap, accessible antiparasitic become such a popular drug used to treat SARS-CoV-2 infections during the COVID pandemic?

In 2020, Australian researchers from the Biomedicine Discovery Institute (BDI) at Monash University made the discovery that Ivermectin could neutralize the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus within 48 hours. The study, a joint effort between Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University in Clayton, Australia, and the Peter Doherty Institute of Infection and Immunity—a joint venture between the University of Melbourne and the Royal Melbourne Hospital, both in Melbourne, Australia—found that, in vitro, the drug proved effective against a number of viruses, including HIV, dengue, influenza, and Zika. The findings suggested that just a single dose of Ivermectin could remove or significantly reduce viral RNA within 24 to 48 hours of SARS-CoV-2 .

Dr. Kylie Wagstaff, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute scientist and leader of the study said: “We found that even a single dose could essentially remove all viral RNA by 48 hours and that even at 24 hours there was a really significant reduction in it.”

A study was published in 2021 in the American Journal of Therapeutics providing evidence that the use of Ivermectin reduces morbidity and mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infections, including time to recovery and viral clearance.11 In addition, Ivermectin is being investigated as an option for treating certain other human viral infections like latent Epstein Barr, which can be reactivated in some individuals when they are infected with SARS-CoV-2 and lead to long COVID.12 13 14

Ivermectin Showed Antiviral Effects Against Omicron and Other Variants

Off-label use of Ivermectin has been the source of much scrutiny among many public health officials throughout and even following the pandemic. And while historically prescribed as an antiparasitic for humans and animals, the drug did show and other variants in 2022 during joint nonclinical research conducted by Japanese pharmaceutical company, Kowa Co. Ltd.15

Additionally, another study published in The Lancet in 2021 found Ivermectin to incite “antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 and provides insights into the type of evaluations to be considered in the assessment of antiviral drugs for the control of COVID.”16

Popular podcast host and health and wellness influencer Joe Rogan posted a video only days after the FDA urged people to stop taking the drug to prevent or treat COVID-19 to share he was taking Ivermectin after contracting the virus. He said that taking Ivermectin in conjunction with monoclonal antibodies, prednisone, azithromycin, a NAD drip, and a vitamin drip, a protocol he shared with his followers, helped him feel “great” only three days later.

FDA’s Condemnation of Ivermectin-Blocked Doctor Prescriptions for COVID Patients

Judge Willet further pointed out that Ivermectin is available in both animal and human form and that doctors have been prescribing the drug to patients for decades. However, after the FDA’s condemnation of Ivermectin as an ineffective and potentially dangerous treatment for COVID-19, pharmacies across the country began refusing to fill doctors’ prescriptions for patients.

A Department of Justice attorney, Ashley Cheumg Honold, clarified the FDA’s position to the court stating…

FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID.17

Despite the FDA’s statement that doctors have the authority to prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID, pharmacies continue to refuse to fill prescriptions for the drug, leaving patients scrambling. Dr Bowden told The Epoch Times:

This needs to come to an end. In telling my patients what medicines they can and cannot have access to, we effectively have a large group of pharmacists practicing medicine without a license. They have no accountability for this yet they are allowed to dictate patient care. … I see it every single day. Enough is enough.18


If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Robertson N. Federal appeals court revives lawsuit against FDA over COVID-19 ivermectin messaging. The Hill. Sept. 2, 2023.

2 Stieber Z. Judge Rules on Lawsuit Against FDA Over Ivermectin. The Epoch Times. Dec. 6, 2022.
3 What Is Sovereign Immunity? Definition and Examples. ThoughtCo.
4 Stieber Z. Judge Rules on Lawsuit Against FDA Over Ivermectin. The Epoch Times. Dec. 6, 2022.

5 Lysiak M. ‘FDA Is Not a Physician’: Appeals Court Sides With Doctors on Ivermectin for COVID-19. The Epoch Times Sept. 2, 2023.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid. 
8
Laing R, Gillan V, Devaney E. Ivermectin – Old Drug, New Tricks? Trends Parasitol June 2017; 33(6): 463-472.

9 Foy BD, Alout H, Seaman JA et al. Efficacy and risk of harms of repeat Ivermectin mass drug administrations for control of malaria (RIMDAMAL): a cluster-randomised trial. The Lancet 2019; 393 (10180): 1517-1526.
10 Santin AD, Scheim DE, McCullough PA et al. Invermection: a multifaceted drug of Nobel prize-honoured distinction with indicated efficacy against a new global scourge, COVID-19. New Microbes New Infect 2021; 42.
11 Kory P, Meduri GU, Varon J et al. Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19. Am J Ther 2021; 28(3).
12 Gold JE, Ikyay RA, Licht WE, Hurley DJ. Investigation of Long COVID Prevalence and its Relationship to Epstein-Barr Virus Reactivation. Pathogens 2021; 10(6).
13 Na L, Zhao L, Zhan X. Quantitative proteomics reveals a broad-spectrum antiviral property of ivermectin benefiting for COVID-19 treatment. J Cell Physiol 2021; 236(4): 2959-2974.
14 Bernal KDE, Whitehurst CB. Incidence of Epstein Barr virus reactivation is elevated in COVID-19 patients. Virus Res 2023; 334: 199157.
15 Reuters. Ivermectin shows ‘antiviral effect’ against COVID, Japanese company says. Jan. 31, 2022.
16 Krolewiecki A et al. Antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin in adults with COVID-19: A proof-of-concept randomized trial. The Lancet June 17, 2021.
17 Lysiak M. ‘FDA Is Not a Physician’: Appeals Court Sides With Doctors on Ivermectin for COVID-19. The Epoch Times Sept. 2, 2023.
18 Lysiak M. Doctor: Pharmacists Continuing to Refuse Ivermectin Prescriptions, Raising Ethical Concerns. The Epoch Times. Sept. 1, 20223.

Trump’s Shocking Answer to ‘Can a Man Become a Woman?’~What Happens when a Presidential Candidate still has no biblical faith

Trump’s Shocking Answer to 'Can a Man Become a Woman?'
AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty
I have to admit, I was shocked when I first saw this clip.

There’s been a lot of talk about Trump’s recent interview on SiriusXM’s “The Megyn Kelly Show,” but his answer to what may have been one of the most important questions was so horrifying awful, I can’t even wrap my head around it.

During the interview, Megyn Kelly asked Trump a very simple question: “Can a man become a woman?”

Easy, right? The answer is “No, absolutely not.” It’s not complex or complicated. There’s no room for nuance, different points of view, or interpretation. A man cannot become a woman. A woman cannot become a man. There’s no gender spectrum, nor are there more than two genders.

Yet, in response to the easy question, Trump first replied with an “Ummmmmm,” then a chuckle, before saying, “In my opinion, you have a man, you have a woman. I think part of it is birth. Can the man give birth? No, although they’ll come up with some answer to that also someday. I heard just the other day they have a way that now the man can give birth. No, I would say I’ll continue my stance on that.”

Related: Money Powers the Transgender Movement, Not Science, Health, or Identity

What kind of an answer is that? Look, the sad reality is that there is no middle ground on this issue. Trump may be strongly against the mutilation of children by the transgender cult, but it feels like Trump is trying to have it both ways on this transgender nonsense, and you just can’t.

Sure, he banned transgender people in the military and is against giving children puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and such, but at the root of this issue isn’t merely whether or not a kid has the mental capacity to consent to transitioning, whether biological men should be able to play in women’s sports, or whether someone on hormones should be in the military. The root of this issue is the fundamental and basic question of whether a man can become a woman or vice versa. And if you even give the slightest hint that maybe “someday” it might be possible, then you legitimatize the transgender movement and the entire industry behind it. To make matters worse, Trump also referred to Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner by feminine pronouns.

Related: Megyn Kelly Has an Epiphany on ‘Preferred Pronouns’

It’s a horrifyingly disappointing answer from Trump. You can watch the entire portion of the interview on the subject of gender here:

Nice Timing: Jill Biden Tests Positive for COVID

Nice Timing: Jill Biden Tests Positive for COVID
AP Photo/Susan Walsh
The media is in fearmongering mode; in recent weeks, we’ve been told about a new COVID-19 variant, a new vaccine in the works, and a potential new mandate. Dr. Anthony Fauci has been resurrected, telling the public that studies that dispute the effectiveness of masks are wrong and that if the CDC recommends masking again, they are right.

Many have observed that it appears the public is being conditioned for the return of the pandemic and all the terrible memories from those dark days: masking, social distancing, vaccine mandates, shutdowns, and, for good measure, illegal changes to election laws for your safety.

Related: Here’s This Month’s Trove of Censored COVID Articles

So when the news dropped that Jill Biden, the wife of and personal handler for Joe Biden, tested positive for COVID-19, my first thought was, “Of course she did; why didn’t I see that coming?” It was inevitable.

Her Communications Director Elizabeth Alexander released a statement Monday evening.

“This evening, the First Lady tested positive for COVID-19,” the statement read. “She is currently experiencing only mild symptoms. She will remain at their home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.”

According to reports, she’s double-vaccinated and double-boosted and previously caught COVID a year ago. So far, Joe Biden remains in the clear.

“Following the First Lady’s positive test for COVID-19, President Biden was administered a COVID test this evening,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement released to the media. “The President tested negative. The President will test at a regular cadence this week and monitor for symptoms.”

Even before this latest development, many suspected that a psyop was afoot, and Jill Biden testing positive has affirmed that suspicion. Naturally, the liberal media was quick to poopoo such “conspiracy theories” and insisted that COVID is a growing problem again.

However, the announcement of the First Lady’s infection comes amid a spike in infections in the U.S. spurred on by the emergence of two new variants of the virus, prompting speculation that fresh COVID restrictions could be on the horizon.

In the week to August 19, there were more than 15,000 hospitalizations due to COVID-19 infections across the U.S., the most recent monitoring figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show—a rise of nearly 19 percent on the week prior.

Admissions have been steadily rising since July, but are far below the highest peaks of the pandemic and appear to be localized into hotspots. A CDC spokesperson told Newsweek on Thursday it currently has no intention to call for a return of mandated mask-wearing, but didn’t deny that this might change if cases of the new variants were to rise significantly.

Newsweek then went on to dismiss the “conspiracy theories” of various right-leaning voices arguing that we’re being primed to go back to pandemic mode soon because of the new COVID variant. But we all know what has happened to “conspiracy theories” in the recent past, don’t we?

U.S. Taxpayers Fund $5 Billion Project NextGen to Develop Novel COVID Vaccines and Drugs

more money for more COVID vaccines

Just three months after the Biden administration announced that U.S. taxpayers would fund a $5 billion initiative called Project NextGen to develop “next generation” COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) awarded $1.4 billion in contracts under the program on Aug. 22, 2023. The total includes “$1 billion for COVID vaccine clinical trials, $326 million to create a new COVID monoclonal antibody drug, and $100 million to develop novel COVID vaccines and therapeutic technologies.”1 2 3

The HHS awards come on the heels of Pfizer implementing cost-cutting measures after sales for its Comirnaty messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID biologic and Paxlovid, a protease inhibitor drug, saw sharp declines this year. After Pfizer’s COVID products underperformed in 2023, the company predicted a rise in infection rates this fall that will inform its future sale strategy in the COVID market as it transitions from a government-dominated sales market to a commercial one.

However, reported cases of new SARS-CoV-2 infections in the U.S. have been rising sooner than expected, with public health officials tracking three new SARS-CoV-2 variants, including EG.5, FL.1.5.1, and BA.2.86. Coinciding with Project NextGen, the latest surge in COVID cases has led some universities and companies to reinstate the mask mandates in yet another repeat effort to “slow the spread” of the new SARS-CoV-2 variants. 3

Mask Wearing Reduced the Risk of Coronavirus Infection and Death by Only Five Percent

Throughout the pandemic, health officials in countries have been divided over whether face coverings effectively prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Research conducted by Cochrane of London, England has provided substantial evidence to resolve this uncertainty. The Cochrane analysis of 78 global studies involving over one million people published on Jan. 30, 2023, found that masks only reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and death by a mere five percent, and authors asserted that the benefits of mask-wearing and mask mandates did not outweigh the risks, such as impeding children’s academic and cognitive development in their early years.4

Considered the “gold standard” in assessing evidence-based medicine and public health policies, Cochrane reviews follow a rigorous methodology, are generally less vulnerable to bias, and only consider high-quality evidence in their systematic reviews that investigate the effects of interventions for disease prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation.5

In response to Cochrane’s new findings, Francois Balloux, PhD, director of the UCL Genetics Institute and professor of computational biology at University College London, wrote:

Irrespective of the limitations of the study, its results indicate that the true impact of medical/surgical masks and N95/P2 respirators on the transmission of respiratory viruses is at best small. 6

Other key findings by Cochrane included: there were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection; and community mask-wearing makes little to no difference in lab-confirmed infections, compared to not masking. However, the authors concluded that immunocompromised or vulnerable individuals may benefit from mask-wearing, since interventions that are not effective at a population level may still provide a personal benefit to at-risk individuals.

Vaccine Failure Persists as CDC Suggests New Variants May Evade Natural and Vaccine-Acquired Immunity

Health authorities warn that the highly mutated BA.2.86 lineage of coronavirus may be more capable than its predecessors to cause infection in people who have been vaccinated for COVID or have been previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said that, due to the high number of mutations detected in this new SARS-CoV-2 strain, it may be more efficient at evading immunity from vaccines and previous infections.7

The federal health agency abruptly stopped tracking breakthrough infections, or instances of vaccine failure in 2021, choosing to only include data on breakthrough infections that result in hospitalizations and deaths.8 Newer COVID booster shots, which COVID vaccine manufacturers and health officials claim will prevent serious complications from infection with an Omicron subvariant known as XBB.1.5, are expected to be available by the end of this month.9 10


If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Baker A. U.S. to Spend Billions on New COVID Vaccines Despite Failure to Prevent Infection. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 23, 2023.
2 Press Release. Project NextGen Awards Over $1.4 Billion to Develop the Future of COVID-19 Vaccines and Therapeutics. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Aug. 22, 2023.
3 Satija B et al. Pfizer considers cost cuts as demand for COVID products falls. Reuters Aug. 1, 2023.
4 Jefferson T, Dooley L et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2023; 1.
5 Useem J, Brennan A, LaValley M, Vickery M, Ameli O, Reinen N, Gill CJ. Systematic Differences between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Meta-Analyses on the Same Topic: A Matched Pair Analysis. PLoS One Dec. 15, 2015; 10(12): e0144980.
6 Francois Balloux, [@BallouxFrancois]. Jan. 30, 2023. X.
7 Jain P. US CDC says new COVID lineage could cause infections in vaccinated individuals. Reuters Aug. 23, 2023.
8 Stein R. CDC Move to Limit Investigations Into COVID Breakthrough Infections Sparks Concerns. NPR June 2, 2021.
9 Reubein R et al. CDC under fire for decision to limit tracking of Covid-19 cases in vaccinated people. Politico July 30, 2021.
10 Benadjaoud Y. Government spending $1.4 billion to study new and improved COVID vaccines, despite low uptake. ABC News Aug. 24, 2023.

Federal Appeals Court Revives FDA Lawsuit Regarding Anti-Ivermectin Campaign

Federal Appeals Court Revives FDA Lawsuit Regarding Anti-Ivermectin Campaign

A sign for the Food And Drug Administration is seen outside of the headquarters on July 20, 2020 in White Oak, Maryland. (Photo by Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images

OAN’s Brooke Mallory
11:48 AM – Monday, September 4, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/federal-appeals-court-revives-fda-lawsuit-regarding-anti-ivermectin-campaign/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

A federal appeals court overturned a prior judgment on Friday, enabling a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lawsuit involving its campaign against the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 to proceed.

In a lawsuit filed against the FDA last year, three different doctors asserted that the agency had overstepped its boundaries in its anti-ivermectin campaign, “acting more like a medical body than a regulator.”

A district judge had originally ruled that the lawsuit could not proceed, but in a Friday decision, the 5th Circuit Appeals judge gave the physicians new hope by remanding the matter to a lower court for reconsideration.

“FDA is not a physician. It has authority to inform, announce, and apprise — but not to endorse, denounce, or advise,” said Judge Don Willett. “The Doctors have plausibly alleged that FDA’s Posts fell on the wrong side of the line between telling about and telling to.”

Ivermectin is an anti-parasite drug that is frequently prescribed to horses but also occasionally prescribed to people as well. The FDA’s campaign, which featured viral posters stating “You are not a horse,” underscored the agency’s warnings that it should not be used to treat the COVID-19 virus.

“Although [the] FDA has approved ivermectin for certain uses in humans and animals, it has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19, nor has the agency stated that it is safe or effective for that use,” the agency’s recommendations stated.

While a handful of people were reportedly hospitalized and some even died from the drug, which occurs if one takes ivermectin in addition to certain other medications, many groups still welcomed it as a miracle cure and claimed to receive beneficial results for their health.

However, In 2021, a review of 14 studies on the use of ivermectin concluded that there was insufficient evidence to justify its usage, adding that “few [of the studies] are considered high quality.”

Yet, “It must be acknowledged that some of these studies were possibly intentionally designed to yield predetermined findings,” researchers maintained.

Besides COVID-19, there have also been reports from those suffering from autoimmune disorders who claim that ivermectin helped combat their negative symptoms and that they have been taking the anti-parasite drug for years.

The National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization are two organizations that have consistently advised against using ivermectin to treat COVID-19.

The anti-ivermectin FDA campaign, according to the three doctors, damaged their doctoral reputations since they had previously encouraged the use of the drug. One doctor was expelled from medical school, and another was even suspended from working at a hospital.

“This case has broad implications for protecting the practice of medicine from unlawful interference by the FDA,” the doctors’ attorney, Jared Kelson, said in a statement. “It’s about ensuring that federal agencies act only within their statutory authority. The FDA crossed a bright line here.”

One of the pro-liberty plaintiffs in the case, Mary Talley Bowen, praised the decision on Friday.

“A small win, or at least a step forward, in a monumental battle to protect the doctor-patient relationship from government tyranny… ONWARD!” Bowen said.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

Biden To Request Funds From Congress For New COVID Vaccine

Biden To Request Funds From Congress For New COVID Vaccine

US President Joe Biden speaks to the press after attending a pilates class in South Tahoe, California, on August 25, 2023. (Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)
US President Joe Biden speaks to the press after attending a pilates class in South Tahoe, California, on August 25, 2023. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

OAN’s Roy Francis
9:56 AM – Saturday, August 26, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/biden-to-request-funds-from-congress-for-new-covid-vaccine/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

President Joe Biden said on Friday that he plans to request more funding from Congress in order to develop a new COVID vaccine.

Biden says he just "signed off" on a funding request for "a new [COVID] vaccine is necessary that works," pic.twitter.com/PNhyFlwFrt

“I signed off this morning on a proposal we have to present to the Congress a request for additional funding for a new vaccine that is necessary, that works,” Biden told reporters while vacationing in Lake Tahoe. “It will likely be recommended that everybody get it no matter whether they’ve gotten it before or not.”

The announcement comes after reports of a recent rise in COVID-19 cases in some regions of the country. Due to the recent reports of a rise in hospitalizations, mask mandates are also slowly being reintroduced by some organizations, such as LionsGate studios.

Updated versions of the vaccine which contain the newer version of the virus are already being developed by Pfizer, Novavx, and Moderna. Officials claim that due to the mutating nature of the virus, the vaccine needs to constantly be updated.

The supplemental funding that the Biden administration recently presented to Congress did not include any funding for COVID-19 vaccines. Instead, the request asked for around $40 billion for short-term “key priorities” such as more aid for Ukraine, federal disaster funds, climate change, and a minimal amount for border security.

In the fall of 2022, Biden had also asked for around $9 billion from Congress for funding for the virus, but the request was denied by Congress at the time.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

There’s More Bad News for the Covid-Vaccinated

Whew Boy… There’s More Bad News for the Covid-Vaccinated

Whew Boy… There’s More Bad News for the Covid-Vaccinated
AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File
Congratulations, everyone! It’s time for another COVID variant! Did you think having already been vaccinated and boosted was gonna get you through this one? Think again!

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported on Wednesday that the emerging BA.2.86 COVID-19 variant could potentially lead to infections in those who not only had COVID before but have previously been vaccinated.

“The large number of mutations in this variant raises concerns of greater escape from existing immunity from vaccines and previous infections compared with other recent variants,” the CDC stated in its risk assessment summary for this new lineage of COVID. “For example, one analysis of mutations suggests the difference may be as large as or greater than that between BA.2 and XBB.1.5, which circulated nearly a year apart.”

Related: Biden Challenged Us to Name One of His Failures. Here Are 8 Big Ones.

Are you scared yet? Well, maybe the CDC will just have to try harder.

Americans have largely gotten over COVID at this point, with only a select few still too paranoid to ditch the masks. I can’t remember the last time I saw someone wearing a mask in public. Even the Biden administration quietly admitted the pandemic was over back in April. At this point, most of the population has acquired COVID-19 antibodies. There’s a reason why deaths and hospitalizations are way, way, way down, and people have long resumed living life normally again and are looking back at the lockdowns and the months of masking with disgust. But with an eerie sense of déjà vu, it feels like we’re once again in the thick of the pandemic and being conditioned to believe something terrible is on the horizon and we have to do something about it.

And the CDC is on it!

“Based on what CDC knows now, existing tests used to detect and medications used to treat COVID-19 appear to be effective with this variant,” the CDC explains. However, there’s a rather interesting and significant caveat to this. According to the CDC, “Scientists are evaluating the effectiveness of the forthcoming, updated COVID-19 vaccine.”

And there it is! A new updated vaccine is in the works. If you thought life was back to normal because you got vaccinated and got boosted every month, you better put your tail back between your legs and sign up to get another updated version of the vaccine. Those Big Pharma profits won’t make themselves, after all.

Lawsuit Against Pharmacies That Refused to Fill Ivermectin Prescriptions Tossed Out

Lawsuit Against Pharmacies That Refused to Fill Ivermectin Prescriptions Tossed Out
AP Photo/Mike Stewart
As my colleague, Kevin Downey, Jr., reported last week at PJ Media, the FDA quietly performed an astonishing about-face regarding its position on ivermectin, declaring doctors can now prescribe it for the treatment of COVID-19.

(Certainly, the demonization of ivermectin following the COVID-19 “vaccines” hitting market had nothing to do with the fact that the COVID-19 emergency use authorization required that there be no other effective treatments available. That would be a “conspiracy theory” – evil and wrong.)

This is quite a dramatic divergence from the FDA’s previous position, the lie that ivermectin is a “horse medicine.”

I have previously chronicled elsewhere the various lies perpetrated by the corporate state media and Public Health™ authorities over the past several years against ivermectin, as it might have competed with Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA shots’ uptake in the general population. After all, no one in their right mind would gamble with an unproven, experimental treatment using novel technology when an actual safe and effective (not to mention cheap) prophylactic measure was available to them.

This week, a federal court in Missouri threw out a lawsuit filed on behalf of COVID-19 patients against pharmacies that refused to fill ivermectin prescriptions legally written by their doctors.

Via KIMT3 News (emphasis added):

A federal appeals court has sided with pharmacies in Albert Lea that refused to fill prescriptions for medications that would be used to treat COVID-19.

Court documents state that in 2021, William and Karla Salier had gotten prescriptions from a doctor in Missouri for ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine to treat their infection with COVID-19.  William Salier had become seriously ill from the virus.  Pharmacists at Walmart and Hy-Vee refused to fill those prescriptions.  Karla Salier says the Walmart pharmacist rudely lectured her about the dangers of treating COVID-19 with ivermectin and the Hy-Vee pharmacist said it was against corporate policy to prescribe the drugs for COVID-19.

William and Karla Salier obtained and used a veterinary version of ivermectin meant for horses and other large animals and quickly recovered. The Saliers then sued Walmart and Hy-vee for violating their “common-law right to self-determination.”

A district court dismissed the Salier’s lawsuit and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit has done the same.  It ruled that Minnesota law allows pharmacists to exercise independent judgment in filling prescriptions and notes that “the FDA and every government agency and major medical authority addressing the issued had denounced and recommended against using ivermectin to treat COVID-19,” and the FDA had revoked its initial emergency-use authorization to use hydroxychloroquine to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

One question remains: how many people suffering from COVID-19 and desperate for help, whose stories may never surface inside of a courtroom, were denied their legal ivermectin prescriptions, went home, and died quietly so they could become another statistic to use to propagandize the public into catatonic fear?

It’s certainly, it appears the court agrees, within any pharmacy’s purview to deny therapeutic medication with a decades-long history of safe use to its customers, but let’s make sure the public knows who’s doing it: Walmart and Hyvee.

If you appreciate the independent journalism we offer at PJ Media, free or corporate slant or state censorship, consider lending financial support to our heavily censored operation. Use the code SAVEAMERICA to get 50% off your annual membership. Click here to sign up. Thank you for your support.

DR. KEN D BERRY, MD: If you take a Statin, Do these 7 things Right Now!

Millions of people take a statin (zocor, lipitor, crestor, livalo, lescol, altocor) thinking it will lower their risk of having a heart attack. What they don't know is that the statin is doing these 7 things to their body; even many doctors don't know all 7. Here are the 7 things a statin does to your body, and the steps you can take to minimize the risk. This is not a complete list, statins do many other worrisome things inside your body, the more you research the more you will know...

Vitamin D rich foods list:    • Top 10 VITAMIN D Rich Foods + 5 Vit D...   Vitamin K2 rich foods list:    • Vitamin K2 Rich Foods (7 Tasty Choice...   CoEnzyme Q10 Supplement: https://amzn.to/3E1miLl Vitamin D3/K2 Supplement: https://amzn.to/3OGCw1o

17 People Died on One Military Base Just This Year, but the Air Force Won’t Say Why

17 People Died on One Military Base Just This Year, but the Air Force Won't Say Why
U.S. Air Force photo/Greg L. Davis, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
A new report from Military.com has revealed that Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma is refusing to reveal the cause of death for 17 base personnel who have passed away this year. How does one base have a death toll of 17 in the span of eight months? Why would the base not want to share information concerning what happened to these individuals and why so many people at one military installation have died?

Since the base is funded with American tax dollars and the people dying are public servants, I think the general public has a right to know what is going on at Tinker Air Force Base, don’t you?

According to the Daily Caller, the base would not provide details about how 17 people working at the base have died from what they called “various causes,” going on to say that several of the deaths were still currently under investigation. Gee, that doesn’t sound suspicious or anything. Several posts on social media, along with a source connected to the base, have made claims that Tinker Air Force Base has suddenly become afflicted by numerous suicides. That’s a rather chilling thought.

“I’m sorry, but we are not going to release the number of deaths at Tinker,” Kimberly Woodruff, a spokesperson representing Tinker Air Force Base, said to the folks at Military.com. “We have ongoing investigations and to protect the families and the units, we won’t comment on those numbers. It is Air Force policy that we do not disclose information about deaths or their circumstances.”

Here’s more from the report:

There is no policy that prohibits releasing the number of deaths at Air Force bases, according to Department of the Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek, Military.com reported. Tinker Air Force Base public affairs later released the number of deaths from the current calendar year to Military.com, but did not disclose their causes.

Several other branches of the military have been swift in identifying deaths and suspected suicides, according to Military.com. The Army and bipartisan lawmakers brought attention to several suicides of service members stationed in Alaska in 2022, and – when inquired – the Navy immediately confirmed to Military.com the deaths and suspected suicides aboard the USS George Washington and USS Theodore Roosevelt.

Teri Caserta, the mother of a sailor who committed suicide in 2018, remarked that the base should be held accountable for releasing details concerning the deaths. Caserta helped to launch the establishment of the Brandon Act, which is named after her deceased son and enables members of the military to seek out treatment for mental health issues discreetly.

“Tinker does not have to disclose the names of the airmen/women who have died, but I believe we as citizens who have service members and who have children looking into serving our country deserve to know why and how airmen/women are dying,” Caserta wrote in an email on Wednesday, according to Military.com. “We need to know that the Air Force takes all deaths as seriously as they claim and, if there is toxicity within the ranks at Tinker, they all should be held accountable for these deaths whether they are suicides or not.”

When the Daily Caller tried to reach out for a comment on the report, Tinker Air Force Base did not immediately offer a response.

It’s not hard to understand why. Something is definitely going on at the base for leadership to be trying so hard to keep the causes of death secret. There are a number of things that could be going on, and if the base wants to avoid speculation, it should release the information. That’s the only way to keep people’s imaginations from running wild.

Biden Allowed Major Donor to Hand Advanced Military Tech to China

He refused to meet with national security officials warning against the deal.

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/biden-allowed-major-donor-to-hand-advanced-military-tech-to-china/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

“When I was in another State they would slip and say ‘now I want to introduce the Senator from DuPont–I mean Delaware’”, Joe Biden had joked at a Senate Subcommittee on Crime session.

There’s a certain truth to the joke. DuPont is the corporation that defines Biden’s career. His first Senate bid was staffed with DuPont employees, including future chief-of-staff and senator Ted Kaufman, who was conveniently allowed to take a “leave of absence” from DuPont to help elect Biden. Biden celebrated his victory at the Hotel DuPont and bought a former DuPont mansion.

DuPont figures in a lot of Biden’s stories. He even claims to have gotten on board with gay marriage when his father showed him a gay couple kissing at DuPont. And Biden figures in the latest DuPont story which involves handing over advanced military technology to China.

Last year, DuPont sold off its biomaterials unit to the Huafon Group of China. Huafon, a massive chemical and finance organization,

Biden’s own defense secretary warned that the sale would put technology that could be used for advanced explosives in China’s hands. Those concerns were not unreasonable. DuPont had been born as a gunpowder firm that came to dominate the American defense industry in the 19th century. DuPont was there handling plutonium on the ground floor of the Manhattan Project even though its former president, Irénée du Pont, had admired Hitler. DuPont has since tried to avoid associations with weapons, but its biomaterials had potential military applications.

Houfan, a massive Chinese chemical and finance organization, which dominates the spandex market (spandex was originally developed by DuPont), boasts in its own spandex division that its commitment to “social responsibility” derives from Communist leadership within the company.

The deputy secretary of the Communist Party branch within Houfan was quoted as emphasizing the role of “Communist Party members and youth league members”.

America has been falling behind Communist China in the explosives race. The Ukraine war had demonstrated all too clearly the limitations of our military production capabilities and our reliance on outdated technologies. In 2021, a factory in Louisiana responsible for making all the Pentagon’s black powder blew up. The factory was originally part of DuPont.

China dominates the mass production of CL-20, the deadliest non-nuclear explosive, and America has struggled to catch up. A report during the Trump administration had warned that “China is also the sole source or a primary supplier for a number of critical energetic materials used in munitions and missiles.” Austin and the Pentagon warned about the deadly consequences of handing over DuPont’s technology which, like CL-20, was developed in America, but would be appropriated by China leading to a grave risk of American deaths in possible future conflicts.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has generally been a loyal political soldier. He had previously toed the line on nearly every Biden initiative. But on DuPont, he broke ranks. National security officials tried to meet with Biden to warn him that the DuPont deal might be good for the Delaware company but was bad for America. Biden however refused to meet with them.

And the deal went through. Despite the supposed safeguards which were supposed to prevent Covation Biomaterials, the name of the new Chinese-controlled company, from getting its hands on the production process, it happened anyway. And the FBI launched an investigation.

Nothing is expected to come of that.

This is far from the first time that advanced American technology has fallen into the hands of our enemies in China, but it’s particularly outrageous because top defense officials, including the secretary of defense, had warned of the consequences, and it happened anyway.

And because there is no company closer to Joe Biden than DuPont.

The Biden family had already been involved in the intersection of China and DuPont when Hunter Biden introduced George Duko, a DuPont executive, to a Chinese businessman who had founded a Communist-linked firm. While Hunter has been sidelined, there’s a history there.

DuPont has been kind to Biden, donating $250,000 to his inauguration committee alone, and the Biden family has been kind to DuPont. When Robert H. Richards IV, a DuPont heir, admitted to raping his 3-year-old daughter, Attorney General Beau Biden defended the judge who refused to lock him up because he has “strong family support” and “will not fare well in prison.”

Beau Biden went on to die (of cancer in the United States, not in Iraq, as Joe Biden has repeatedly lied) and the Biden clan decided that the best way to memorialize the man who let a child rapist walk was to set up the Beau Biden Foundation for the Protection of Children. The foundation, currently holding its ‘Child Protection Classic’ at the DuPont Country Club, became famous when laptops bearing its sticker turned up filled with pornographic materials featuring its chairman, Hunter, including allegations of supposed inappropriate behavior with underage girls.

There is no understanding of the Bidens without understanding Delaware and DuPont. The decline of DuPont was a pivotal moment for Joe Biden’s political career. The Bidens have never been national figures and though Joe, his brother, and his son crisscrossed the world, they were always local grifters. DuPont’s troubles caused them to turn to China.

Hunter Biden’s firm had bet on Fisker: one of the companies that the Bidens hoped would replace DuPont. Biden, then Obama’s veep, had announced a $529 million low-interest loan (and another $20 million from the state), to the European electric car company that was supposed to build a massive manufacturing facility in Delaware. Joe Biden had promised that “this is seed money that will return back to the American consumer in billions and billions and billions of dollars in good new jobs.” “It’s our fund that’s in the deal,” Hunter wrote.

An investment banker emailed congratulations to Hunter on Fisker’s purchase of a former Delaware GM plant and offered a “sincere thanks for any and all help provided concerning Fisker”.

Fisker only sold 2,000 of its ‘Karma’ electric cars and went out of business. Americans lost $139 million on the Biden project. One of the $142,000 cars went to Hunter Biden alongside Leonardo DiCaprio and other connected figures. The car was paid for by a Kazakh businessman allied with the regime and with Putin’s Chechen warlord whom Joe and Hunted Biden dined.

With Fisker going under, Hunter turned to Chinese investors. Fisker was gobbled up by Wanxiang. Two executives from the massive Wanxiang Chinese automotive company had met with Joe Biden at the White House that year. Hunter had been financially linked to Wanxiang and an executive who met with Joe Biden emailed Hunter offering to help him get his Fisker fixed.

The fate of Fisker helps shed light on how our national security was sold out with the DuPont deal. Joe and Hunter Biden are far more interested in what’s good for DuPont than what’s good for America. Biden’s decision is likely to increase China’s military edge and weaken our own.

China didn’t have to buy the President of the United States, just the “Senator from DuPont”.

Rand Paul: We Now Have the ‘Smoking Gun’~Dr. Anthony Fauci now referred to the [Department of Justice] for criminal investigation, accused of lying under oath to Congress about his knowledge of the U.S.-funded COVID research in Wuhan.

Dr. Anthony Fauci now referred to the [Department of Justice] for criminal investigation, was accused of lying under oath to Congress about his knowledge of the U.S.-funded COVID research in Wuhan. … He said, adamantly, that the government never did this gain-of-function research. We now have the Government Accountability Office, and the GAO, has admitted that the funding came from the NIH. We have the acting director, [Lawrence] Tabak, of the NIH admitting in writing that it came from NIH. But now, really, we have the smoking gun, and that is Fauci in private saying the opposite of what he was saying in public when he was publicly telling me that, absolutely, we did not fund gain-of-function research in China.

This Steams My Clams: Ivermectin Is Suddenly OK for COVID?

This Steams My Clams: Ivermectin Is Suddenly OK for COVID?
Pat Wellenbach
Perhaps a doctor can prescribe a gasoline enema for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A lawyer for the FDA recently declared doctors may now — years after it’s needed — prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19. Just in time!

Now that the nation is down to a mere 205 COVID deaths per week, and the pharmaceutical-industrial complex has hoovered billions of dollars in cheddar while Americans watched loved ones die on hospital ventilators via Facetime after tens of thousands of people have suffered adverse effects from the vaccine clot-shot — now the FDA claims it’s always been cool for doctors to give their patients a cheap drug many folks knew helped people with the Bat-stew flu.

Oh really? Roll the tape.

FACT-O-RAMA! The punchinellos at the FDA beclowned themselves by tweeting, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it,” after podcaster and comedian Joe Rogan announced ivermectin helped him overcome COVID. Never mind that the FDA approved ivermectin for human consumption decades earlier.

Some bozos at the FDA were tickled pinko when their embarrassing tweet went viral.

Look at this whopper of a lie on the FDA’s website:

COVID-19. We’ve been living with it for what sometimes seems like forever. Given the number of deaths that have occurred from the disease, it’s perhaps not surprising that some consumers are turning to drugs not approved or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

I guess the jackpuddings at the FDA “forgot” ivermectin was cleared for humans in 1987.

Let’s take a quick walk down memory lane and reveal some of the commies who tried to scare us away from a cheap, effective medicine to fight COVID.

NYCOURTS.gov:

“Never use medications intended for animals on yourself or other people. Animal ivermectin products are very different from those approved for humans. Use of animal ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans is dange rous.”

University of Kansas:

“Ivermectin shown ineffective in treating COVID-19, according to multi-site study including KU Medical Center.”

The American Medical Association:

“Taking a drug for an unapproved use can be very dangerous and misinformation that says it is OK to take ivermectin for COVID-19—or in large doses—is wrong, the FDA consumer update warns. Even approved levels of ivermectin can interact with other medications such as blood thinners. Overdose of ivermectin can also cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hypotension, allergic reactions, dizziness, ataxia, seizures, coma and even death.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci:

‘Don’t do it’: Dr. Fauci warns against using ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19

I could add squawking heads from the Communist News Network (CNN) and the rest of the Pravda Press, but I’m sure you get the point.

So why did the FDA lawyer claim doctors have always had the right to prescribe ivermectin?

Three doctors sued the feds over the FDA’s “right” to dictate how physicians treat their patients. All three claim they were fired for trying to prescribe ivermectin for their patients, which they say is because the FDA warned people against ivermectin, a notion the FDA now denies.

“The fundamental issue in this case is straightforward,” the doctors’ attorney, Jared Kelson, declared in court. “After the FDA approves the human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no.”

Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyer representing the FDA, claims the agency never said doctors couldn’t prescribe ivermectin.

“What about when it said, ‘No, stop it’?” Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod asked Honold, referring to the aforementioned tweet. “Why isn’t that a command? If you were in English class, they would say that was a command.”

In response, Honold fell on her clown sword and stated that those words were “merely quips.”

Related: Unfollow the Science: 300 COVID Articles Pulled, Many Over Lack of Ethical Standards

I suspect the truth is this: there was too much money on the table for the pharmaceutical-industrial complex to lose. Ivermectin costs pennies. How can Pfizer fat cats line their pockets and throw some cheddar back at Democrats who helped them rake it in on a cheap drug like ivermectin?

Heartbroken Dad Exposes Hospital COVID Protocols He Believes Killed His Teenage Daughter

Heartbroken Dad Exposes Hospital COVID Protocols He Believes Killed His Teenage Daughter
AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko)
The unfortunate reality in 2023 is that unless you’re literally on death’s door, out of options, or you require emergency care for an acute injury such as severe trauma, a mainline American hospital — especially one run by a large institution dependent on government dollars — may not be the ideal place to turn if you care about you or your family’s health.

Some might disagree with that sentiment or dismiss it as hyperbole — but certainly not this dad who claims that a Wisconsin hospital killed his daughter with its COVID protocols.

Via The Defender (the publication wing of RFK Jr.’s Children’s Defense Fund):

“I miss her immensely.”

Those are the words of Scott Schara, father of Grace Naomi (Emily) Schara, who died on Oct. 13, 2021, at age 19 at Ascension St. Elizabeth Hospital in Appleton, Wisconsin.

Grace died just days after she tested positive for COVID-19 and went to an urgent care facility where she was treated for low oxygen levels.

Before reading further, I already foresaw the unfortunate subsequent series of events before they appeared to me in the text, as they are not novel: the doctors, prodded by the hospital administrators through policy edicts, threw this girl on a ventilator before they even gave her lungs and heart a fighting chance to up her oxygen levels on their own, potentially with the help of medication.

Continuing:

Grace’s ordeal began on Oct. 1, 2021, when she tested positive for COVID-19 using a home testing kit. Five days later, her oxygen saturation had dropped to 88% as shown on the pulse oximeter her parents purchased in accordance with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance’s (FLCCC) COVID-19 treatment protocol.

According to the protocol, hospitalization is recommended if oxygen saturation drops below 94%. Schara, however, now questions this recommendation.

“I’m not throwing FLCCC under the bus at all, but the fear propaganda influenced my critical thinking,” he said. “If you’re going to start measuring something, you’ve got to know what to measure against, not a number someone throws out.”

“What I’ve learned subsequently is when a person catches a cold or flu, their oxygen saturation naturally drops,” Schara said. He recounted being hospitalized with COVID-19 and low blood oxygen levels around the same time as his daughter, at a different hospital where he “just about died.”

It is well-documented that – even according to the most hardline Branch COVIDians like CNN’s resident Public Health™ propagandist, Leana Wen – that not only were COVID deaths overcounted, but hospitals were financially incentivized by the government to toss patients onto ventilators as often as possible.

Right now Medicare is determining that if you have a COVID-19 admission to the hospital you get $13,000. If that COVID-19 patient goes on a ventilator you get $39,000, three times as much. Nobody can tell me after 35 years in the world of medicine that sometimes those kinds of things impact on what we do.
-Dr. Scott Jensen, practicing physician

Via WJAR 10 (NBC):

Under the CARES Act passed by Congress earlier this year, Medicare, which covers Americans over age 65, pays hospitals up to 20% more for some types of high-cost care that patients with severe COVID-19 may need. That includes things like putting a patient on a ventilator and a longer total time spent in the hospital.

In addition to the financial incentives, a hospital full of patients on respirators serves as magnificent COVID fear fodder to peddle on corporate state media in the service of continuing forced masking, forced vaxing, and lockdowns in perpetuity.

Continuing via The Defender:

According to Schara, Grace was administered Precedex, a sedative produced by Pfizer “that should never be used with COVID.” However, “they use it because their goal with COVID is dollars and the main dollars are for getting somebody on a ventilator — and they have to be sedated to be put on a ventilator,” he said.

“They asked my wife and I five different times for a pre-authorization to put Grace on a ventilator,” Schara said. “We never approved it, nor should anybody approve a ventilator when somebody has a COVID diagnosis. A ventilator has a 90% kill rate with COVID, so why do it? And it’s simply because of the financial incentives.”

1 2 3 4 5 6 36