In an almost-macabre maneuver, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has pre-empted a vote by the their Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) by posting the jabs on a new childhood vaccination schedule two days before the vote. The ACIP is supposed to vote on whether to add the shots to the schedule sometime in the afternoon of Wednesday, October 19, 2022.
Whether the CDC is clairvoyant or the vote was already set and released to CDC officials is only a guess, but the bottom line is the new schedule has Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA, gene therapy shots on the schedule for babies as young as 6 months old. They also have Jansen’s and Novavax’s COVID shots on the schedule for young adults age 18 and older.
Incidentally, footnotes at the bottom of the schedule acknowledge the risk of myocarditis with the shots. In a related post linked from the schedule and dated only with a “to-be-announced” note for October, the CDC elaborates on safety concerns for these shots.
The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is meeting on October 19-20, 2022. Although the draft agenda is vague, there is a possibility that they will discuss and potentially even vote on adding COVID-19 vaccines to the recommended CDC schedule of childhood vaccines.This meeting will also discuss the COVID-19 “vaccine” safety and effectiveness in pregnant women and infants 6 months old and older.The meeting is open to the public and can be live-streamed here.
We need YOU to ensure this approval is NOT granted.
COVID vaccines have been administered to millions of people worldwide on the premise that they were safe and effective. There was no clinical data to support these claims.Overwhelming evidence shows that these vaccines are neither safe nor effective in almost every age group and particularly in children and persons under 60 years.
Please read the FACTS below for details and to easily help you take action.
Please stand up to protect our children! Our voices together are stronger than power and profit-driven Big Pharma and the unconstitutional overreach and violation of parental rights by our government.
FOUR WAYS that you can ACT NOW:
1. Click here to emailall of the ACIP Committee members to VOTE NO on adding the COVID-19 shots to the recommended immunization schedule. (If your email provider doesn’t recognize this link, their email addresses are provided below to copy into your email’s “To” line. Tell them to VOTE NO on adding the COVID-19 shots to the recommended childhood immunization schedule).
2. Follow up with a phone call to the ACIP Committee members listed here
(especially Dr. Long as her email address is not available).
PHONE CALLS ARE CRITICAL! You can call at any hour and leave a message.
**Written comments must be received on or before October 20, 2022, so please take a moment to do it now**
Example Text: “I oppose adding a COVID-19 vaccine requirement to the childhood schedule of immunizations.” Or include some of the FACTS (below).
4. Forward this action alert to other concerned parents, grandparents, and citizens.
Thank you!!
FACTS:
The COVID vaccines are not traditional vaccines. Rather, they are experimental genetic products with novel mechanisms of action and many unknown short- and especially long-term risks. The CDC and FDA did not determine the long-term safety of the current COVID vaccines in children before instituting current child vaccine policies. At least five years of testing/research are necessary before we can really understand the risks.
As of October 7, there have been 31,470 deaths, 34,395 life-threatening adverse events, 58,847 cases of permanent disability, and over 317,000 hospitalizations and emergency room visits following COVID-19 vaccination reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). You can access this data yourself by going to the CDC’s website: https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html According to an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality report: “Adverse events from vaccines are common but underreported, with less than one percent reported”. Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS) (ahrq.gov)
Other serious injuries in children include severe allergic reactions, blood clots and strokes, encephalitis/encephalopathy, and other autoimmune and neurologic disorders. In older persons there is evidence of loss of fertility and cancer. The CDC and FDA have failed to acknowledge, disclose, or explain to the U.S. people the overwhelming evidence of injuries and deaths reported to official U.S. vaccine safety tracking databases and in the pharmaceutical companies’ own clinical trial data.
The VAERS reports of myocarditis worldwide prompted a number of European countries to prohibit the COVID shot in children and teens or ban them altogether. How can the CDC justify instead a vote to recommend it for school-age children?
Healthy children under 18 have virtually no risk of death from COVID, a 99.995% recovery rate and the vast majority have minimal symptoms. CDC data show that most children (more than three out of four) already have developed natural immunity to the virus and thus have no demonstrated need for vaccination. There is no benefit to vaccinating children given the known serious health risks of the shot that parents and children may have to live with for the rest of their lives.
The CDC and FDA have promoted the false and misleading claims that “COVID vaccines are safe and effective” and “benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks” but failed to provide objective quantitative evidence that supports their scientific basis. They have failed to acknowledge, disclose or explain to the U.S. people the overwhelming evidence of injuries and deaths reported to official U.S. vaccine safety tracking databases and in the pharmaceutical companies’ own clinical trial data.
During FDA’s October 26, 2021 Vaccine Advisory Committee meeting, multiple advisors voiced concerns over COVID-19 vaccination among healthy children. FDA Advisor Dr. Mark Sawyer said, “We’re all concerned about the myocarditis issue, and I do think the model has overestimated the hospitalizations prevented. I do think we need it as a tool for high-risk children.” FDA adviser Dr. James Hildreth stated, “I do believe children at high risk should be vaccinated but vaccinating all the children to achieve that just seems a bit much for me.”
Parents’ personal health decisions to accept or reject the vaccine for their minor children were made without their true voluntary informed consent due to intentional failure to provide complete and accurate information about risks, benefits or alternative options and, in numerous instances, coercion, retaliation or social restrictions. This violates the Nuremberg Code, parental rights and the fundamental human right of bodily autonomy.
Two antibodies have been uncovered that are so effective at neutralizing COVID-19 — and all of its variants — that they believe the antibodies could serve as an “effective substitute for vaccines”
The antibodies — TAU-1109 and TAU-2310 — bind to a different area of the spike protein than other antibodies, one that doesn’t undergo many mutations
TAU-1109 is 92% effective at neutralizing the omicron strain and 90% effective at neutralizing the delta strain
TAU-2310 has an efficacy rate of 84% at neutralizing omicron and a 97% efficacy rate against the delta variant
The researchers believe that with effective antibody treatment, “we will not have to provide booster doses to the entire population every time there is a new variant”
Researchers at Tel Aviv University revealed two antibodies that are so effective at neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 — and all of its variants — that they believe the antibodies could serve as an “effective substitute for vaccines.”1 One of the glaring failures surrounding COVID-19 shots is their lack of effectiveness against emerging COVID-19 strains.
By choosing the spike protein on which to base COVID-19 shots, scientists picked a protein that not only was known to be toxic to humans but was not the part of the virus that prompted the best immune response.
Spike protein mutates rapidly, which essentially destroys virtually any protection that the shot provides shortly after it’s given. The end result is a seemingly never-ending series of annual shots and boosters, which can only offer rapidly waning protection. If the Israeli researchers’ findings are verified and the antibodies turn out to be as effective as suspected, it could eliminate COVID-19 booster shots entirely.2
Previous Antibody Treatments Had Mixed Results
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has authorized multiple monoclonal antibody (mAb) cocktails for the treatment of COVID-19. However, as variants emerged, their effectiveness varied, with some becoming ineffective and others retaining their activity.
“This indicates that some antibodies elicited by infection are more variation-sensitive than others, and that antibody breadth of specificity, and not only potency, should be considered,” the researchers, from the department of clinical microbiology and immunology at Tel Aviv University’s Sackler Faculty of Medicine,3 wrote in the journal Communications Biology.4
For instance, in January 2022, the FDA limited the use of two monoclonal antibody treatments — bamlanivimab and etesevimab, which are administered together, and REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) — to patients infected with a variant known to be susceptible to them.5 The two antibody treatments mentioned had lost much of their effectiveness against the omicron variant, leading to the usage restriction in people infected with omicron.
On the other hand, in February 2022, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for a monoclonal antibody treatment known as bebtelovimab, which retained activity against the omicron variant.6 According to the FDA:7
“Bebtelovimab works by binding to the spike protein of the virus that causes COVID-19, similar to other monoclonal antibodies that have been authorized for the treatment of high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 and shown a benefit in reducing the risk of hospitalization or death.”
The way the antibodies bind to the spike protein may hold the key to their ultimate effectiveness against various strains. In previous research conducted in October 2020, lead study author Natalia Freund and colleagues isolated nine antibodies from people who recovered from the original COVID-19 strain in Israel. Freund stated in a news release:8
“In the previous study, we showed that the various antibodies that are formed in response to infection with the original virus are directed against different sites of the virus. The most effective antibodies were those that bound to the virus’s ‘spike’ protein, in the same place where the spike binds the cellular receptor ACE2.
Of course, we were not the only ones to isolate these antibodies, and the global health system made extensive use of them until the arrival of the different variants of the coronavirus, which in fact rendered most of those antibodies useless.”
Two Antibodies Neutralize All COVID-19 Strains
The featured study picks up where the October 2020 study left off, revealing two antibodies — TAU-1109 and TAU-2310 — that bind to a different area of the spike protein — one that doesn’t undergo many mutations — making them capable of neutralizing all known strains of COVID-19. According to Freund:9
“In the current study, we proved that two other antibodies, TAU-1109 and TAU-2310, which bind the viral spike protein in a different area from the region where most of the antibodies were concentrated until now (and were therefore less effective in neutralizing the original strain) are actually very effective in neutralizing the Delta and Omicron variants.”
Specifically, they found TAU-1109 is 92% effective at neutralizing the omicron strain and 90% effective at neutralizing the delta strain. TAU-2310 has an efficacy rate of 84% at neutralizing omicron and a 97% efficacy rate against the delta variant.10 The study was conducted in collaboration with the University of California at San Diego, where the two antibodies were sent for additional testing against live viruses in laboratory cultures.
The antibodies were also tested against pseudoviruses at Bar-Ilan University in the Galilee. “The results were identical and equally encouraging in both tests,” according to a news release.11 What’s interesting is that the mutating virus may have played a part in making the two antibodies so effective. Freund explained:12
“The infectivity of the virus increased with each variant because each time, it changed the amino acid sequence of the part of the spike protein that binds to the ACE2 receptor, thereby increasing its infectivity and at the same time evading the natural antibodies that were created following vaccinations.
In contrast, the antibodies TAU-1109 and TAU-2310 don’t bind to the ACE2 receptor binding site, but to another region of the spike protein – an area of the viral spike that for some reason does not undergo many mutations – and they are therefore effective in neutralizing more viral variants. These findings emerged as we tested all the known COVID strains to date.”
COVID Booster Shots Are Not the Answer
Freund believes that the antibodies are so effective they could ultimately replace COVID-19 booster shots. This is welcome news, as most protection gained from COVID-19 shots, including boosters, doesn’t last.
One study funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention involved data from 10 states collected from August 26, 2021, to January 22, 2022, periods during which both the delta and omicron variants were circulating.13 Within two months of the second COVID-19 shot, protection against emergency department and urgent care visits related to COVID-19 was at 69%. This dropped to 37% after five months post-shot.
The low effectiveness five months after the initial shot series is what prompted officials to recommend a booster dose — and the third shot “boosted” effectiveness to 87%. This boost was short-lived, however. Within four to five months post-booster, protection against emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) visits decreased to 66%, then fell to just 31% after five months or more post-booster.14
Rather than admitting defeat, health officials are planning to hand out even more doses of their embarrassingly ineffective boosters with new so-called “updated” shots. On August 31, 2022, the FDA amended the EUAs of Moderna and Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots to authorize bivalent formulations to be used as booster doses at least two months after a previous booster or primary serious of the shots.
“The bivalent vaccines, which we will also refer to as “updated boosters,” contain two messenger RNA (mRNA) components of SARS-CoV-2 virus, one of the original strain of SARS-CoV-2 and the other one in common between the BA.4 and BA.5 lineages of the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2,” the FDA stated.15
In addition to the strong possibility that protection against COVID-19 will once again rapidly disappear following the booster, there’s a real risk of serious adverse events from repeatedly artificially inflating antibodies in your body via repeated booster shots.
This tricks your body into thinking it’s always infected with COVID-19, a condition that can only lead to a “death zone,” accelerating the development of autoimmune conditions such as Parkinson’s, Kawasaki disease and multiple sclerosis, according to tech leader and COVID analyst Marc Girardot, who urged a retreat from the COVID shot “death zone” before it’s too late.16
With Antibody Treatment ‘We Will Not Have to’ Use ‘Boosters’
There may be a light at the end of the tunnel, as Freund is confident the “cross-neutralizing capabilities of antibodies naturally elicited during wild type SARS-CoV-2 infection” may end up providing an alternative to booster shots. She stated:17
“For reasons we still don’t yet fully understand, the level of antibodies against COVID-19 declines significantly after three months, which is why we see people getting infected again and again, even after being vaccinated three times.
In our view, targeted treatment with antibodies and their delivery to the body in high concentrations can serve as an effective substitute for repeated boosters, especially for at-risk populations and those with weakened immune systems.
COVID-19 infection can cause serious illness, and we know that providing antibodies in the first days following infection can stop the spread of the virus. It is therefore possible that by using effective antibody treatment, we will not have to provide booster doses to the entire population every time there is a new variant.”
Natural Immunity Is Key
This is encouraging, though not exactly surprising considering what’s known about natural immunity — the type earned by recovering from infection. A 2022 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM)18 is just one example of research showing natural COVID-19 immunity is not only effective but lasts longer than the immunity that’s acquired from COVID-19 shots.19
What’s more, prior COVID-19 infection — i.e., natural immunity — offered better protection against symptomatic omicron infection more than one year later than three doses of COVID-19 shots did after one month.
To put it into numbers, a graph in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that previous infection was 54.9% effective against symptomatic omicron infection after more than 12 months, while three doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot were only 44.7% effective a month later. The same held true for three doses of Moderna’s COVID-19 shot, which were only 41.2 % effective after one month, compared to 53.5% effectiveness for natural immunity more than a year later.20
Another one of the most talked-about reports showing the superiority of natural immunity involved data presented July 17, 2021, to the Israeli Health Ministry, which revealed that, of more than 7,700 COVID-19 cases reported, only 72 occurred in people who had previously had COVID-19 — a rate of less than 1%. In contrast, more than 3,000 cases — or approximately 40% — occurred in people who had received a COVID-19 shot.21
In other words, those who were vaccinated were nearly 700% more likely to develop COVID-19 than those who had natural immunity from a prior infection.22
Why is there a good chance you haven’t heard about this news? Repeated booster shots equate to ongoing dollar signs for Big Pharma and the health agencies and officials it controls. So it remains to be seen whether an antibody treatment that targets every COVID-19 variant effectively will ever see the light of day in hospitals and outpatient clinics.
Your Labs Are Normal is a powerful autobiographical short film highlighting one woman’s struggle with chronic Lyme disease, a widely misunderstood and politicized illness that affects thousands of people every year. When Rhisa, an otherwise healthy woman in her 20s, falls ill with debilitating headaches, fatigue, and chronic pain, she and her loved ones search New York for a diagnosis. Even as Rhisa’s health deteriorates, doctors insist that her lab tests don’t indicate illness. Wracked with pain and dismissed by healthcare professionals, she falls into despair until a chance encounter with a nurse finally gives Rhisa her answer: for years, she’s been suffering from undiagnosed Lyme disease. The story is only made more compelling by the fact that it’s completely rooted in personal experience— writer/director Rhisa Parera bares her soul as she recounts her own decades-long battle with chronic Lyme, and the result is a subtle, delicate, and moving story of chronic illness, endurance, and the complex failings of our healthcare system.
New York City theatrical premiere + Oscar-qualifying run
The Lyme documentary “The Quiet Epidemic” will have a week of Oscar-qualifying screenings at the IFC Center in New York City—with an opening night on Thursday, December 1.
According to the filmmakers, “This is a unique opportunity to build buzz around Lyme disease in one of the world’s largest cities, and to celebrate the completion of this film’s festival circuit.”
See below for ways you can view this important film.
Upcoming *VIRTUAL* and in-person screenings
1. Hamptons International Film Festival
In-person screening + Q&A: Sunday, October 16th @ 11:00 AM, Regal UA East Hampton (tickets)
2. New Haven Documentary Film Festival
In-person screenings: Sunday, October 16th @ 7:00 PM (tickets) and Saturday, October 22nd @ 12:30 PM, Bow-Tie Criterion Cinemas (tickets)
3. Twin Cities Film Festival
Online (in the U.S.): Thursday, October 20th – Saturday, October 29th (virtual tickets)
4. SCAD Savannah Film Festival (Georgia)
In-person screening + Q&A: Monday, October 24th @ 1:00 PM, SCAD Museum of Art (tickets)
5. DOCUTAH International Film Festival
In-person screenings + Q&As: Thursday, November 3rd @ 11:00 AM (tickets) and Friday, November 4th @ 4:50 PM (tickets)
6. Rocky Mountain Women’s Film Festival
In-person screening: Saturday, November 12th @ 9:00 AM (tickets)
7. DOCNYC
In-person screening + Q&A: Saturday, November 12th @ 11:15 AM, Cinépolis Chelsea (tickets) Online (in the U.S.): Sunday, November 13th – Sunday, November 27th (virtual tickets)
8. Oscar-qualifying Run *Opening Night* at the IFC Center
In-person screening + Q&A: Thursday, December 1st, IFC Center (time + tickets TBD)
Record numbers of tick-borne diseases in Maine this year
Sept. 30, 2022
Maine is on track to break records for several tick-borne diseases this year.
In a news release this week, the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention reported more than 1,900 cases of Lyme disease so far in 2022. This compares to about 1,500 last year.
The agency also recorded nearly 700 cases of anaplasmosis, over 160 cases of babesiosis, 10 cases of hard tick relapsing fever and four cases of Powassan encephalitis.
“This is a record high for Powassan encephalitis cases,” the agency said. “Maine is also on track to break records for anaplasmosis, babesiosis and Lyme disease cases this year.”
The Federation of State Medical Boards is a very influential private nonprofit whose official mission is vaguely defined as “representing the state medical and osteopathic regulatory boards”
Through their influence and their significant lobbying efforts, they act as a force for censoring and punishing physicians who don’t toe the official party line
Since 1990s, FSMB has been attacking “alternative” medicine practitioners
This organization is said to have significantly contributed to the problem of opioid crisis
Recently, FSMB was exposed by a Dr. Bruce Dooley, an American doctor in New Zealand
Dr. Bruce Dooley, an American Doctor in New Zealand
Recently, Bruce Dooley, an American doctor in New Zealand, exposed the role of the Federation of State Medical Boards — an influential American NGO — in shaping not just American but also international health policy in favor of Big Pharma, all under the guise of “protecting” patients’ rights.
Using Censorship and Mob Tactics to Protect Big Pharma
You might have heard that last year, the Federation pushed for harsh censorship and persecution of independently-thinking physicians. In July 2021, it released the following statement:
“Physicians who generate and spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation are risking disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license. Due to their specialized knowledge and training, licensed physicians possess a high degree of public trust and therefore have a powerful platform in society, whether they recognize it or not.
They also have an ethical and professional responsibility to practice medicine in the best interests of their patients and must share information that is factual, scientifically grounded and consensus-driven for the betterment of public health. Spreading inaccurate COVID-19 vaccine information contradicts that responsibility, threatens to further erode public trust in the medical profession and puts all patients at risk.”
Taking a cue from FSMB, in September 2021, the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM), the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), and the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) issued a statement of support of FSMB’s position, while hinting that “misinformation” really meant any medical opinion that did not support the pharma-friendly establishment views.
Then in April 2022, FSMB released another statement whose Orwellian hypocrisy is in a league of its own. This is how it started:
“Truthful and accurate information is central to the provision of quality medical care. It is instrumental for obtaining informed consent from patients and supports the trust that patients hold in the medical profession.
Honesty, truthfulness and transparency are virtues that society expects of all health professionals, and they are traits that are indispensable to physicians carrying out their professional responsibilities and interacting with patients and the public.
False information is harmful and dangerous to patients, and to the public trust in the medical profession, especially when licensed physicians disseminate misinformation or disinformation about a disease or illness, including its prevention, management or treatment …”
“Physicians must remain objective and impartial in the delivery of information and in selecting or curating information that is deemed relevant to patient care and public health. If a treatment is recommended over alternatives, the recommendation must be based in scientific evidence, rather than opinion or motives that do not benefit the patient’s health or that of the public.”
Good words, right? However, here is the conclusion they drew:
“While respect for patient autonomy is an essential component of the physician-patient relationship, neither the patient’s autonomy, nor the physician’s professional autonomy, is absolute. Only reasonable [by whose standards?] requests on the part of the patient should be granted, and only scientifically justified [again, by whose standards?] treatment options should be recommended by the physician.”
They also used their original language and stated, again, that physicians who spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation risk “disciplinary action, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license.” So much for honesty, scientific integrity, and informed consent!
In the meanwhile, in California, the alarming Assembly Bill 2098 was passed by the California Senate on August 29 2022 and is now awaiting Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature. The bill is seeking to “designate the dissemination of misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or “COVID-19,” as unprofessional conduct.”
Upside-Down Language
Upside-down language is a technique that “hacks” our instincts in order to trick us into acting against our best interests.
“Upside-down language is treacherous because in the natural world, the method of “disguising as a friend in order to catch prey” is strictly a hunting technique — but today, the power holders apply it across the board, to the entire population. Which then, if we think about it honestly, makes it clear what kind of relationship we’ve been having with the Machine.”
The Federation of State Medical Boards has perfected this method to a fascinating degree. They seems to be loyal to the prestigious goal of protecting the interests of the owners of the pharmaceutical industry — but they are wrapping their pro-Big-Pharma campaigns in the warm and fuzzy language about protecting the rights and the safety of the patient. For shame …
Who Is FSMB, Anyway?
FSMB is a private organization with a nonprofit status whose official mission is very vaguely defined as “representing the state medical and osteopathic regulatory boards – commonly referred to as state medical boards – within the United States, its territories and the District of Columbia.”
In their own words, it “supports its member boards as they fulfill their mandate of protecting the public’s health, safety and welfare through the proper licensing, disciplining, and regulation of physicians and, in most jurisdictions, other health care professionals.”
”The FSMB serves as a national voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, data, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best practices.”
What does it mean? Like I said in my earlier Substack, “in what capacity, and by what authority, does this influential group represent and support state medical boards?” Who knows.
It is tremendously powerful: whatever it suggests in terms of medical care policies are often adopted by the state medical boards. A private trade association with no public funding, transparency, or accountability arguably has the power to interpret state medical law and grant or revoke medical licenses!”
History of FSMB
FSMB was created in 1912, on the tail of the 1910 Flexner report that was commissioned by the Rockefeller interests and used to “consolidate” the American (and then international) medical industry “under the boot of the likes of the Rockefellers.” The sources of FSMB’s funding seem to be veiled in secrecy, short of the publicly available information on the nonprofit directory Guidestar. Dr. Paul Martin Kempen provided some more insight into the FSMB and wrote:
“Despite the implications of its name, the Federation of State Medical Boards, Inc. (FSMB … is not a governmental authority. None of these entities have official legislative or regulatory power afforded by any federal or state government. FSMB, however, uses its contacts and influence with state medical boards (SMBs) to advance its corporate products. This may be called ‘crony capitalism.’”
FSMB’s Lobbying
According to ProPublica, the list of agencies it lobbies since 2010 includes the following:
“U.S. Senate, House of Representatives, Centers For Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), Centers For Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Food & Drug Administration (FDA), Health & Human Services – Dept of (HHS), Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA), Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Agency for Health Care Policy & Research, Office of Natl Drug Control Policy (NDCP), Veterans Affairs – Dept of (VA), White House Office, Defense – Dept of (DOD), Natl Institutes of Health (NIH), Executive Office of the President (EOP), Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Government Accountability Office (GAO), Justice – Dept of (DOJ), Defense – Dept of (DOD), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Homeland Security – Dept of (DHS), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of the Vice President of the United States, Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP), Indian Health Service, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), Transportation – Dept of (DOT), Education – Dept of, Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).”
And here is a partial list of bills:
It is worth noting that they also seem to be on a mission to attack hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.Case in point: two bills that they list on their website as their key “advocacy” issues:
On a side note, here is a comprehensive article by Dr. Meryl Nass about the attack on hydroxychloroquine, and here is another, also comprehensive, article by Dr. Pierre Kory about the attack on ivermectin. Both are worth checking out!
FSMB’s Role in the Opioid Crisis
In her recent Substack, Dr. Colleen Huber described the lawsuit of the brave pediatrician, Dr. Paul Thomas, and his Amended Complaint that “goes into detail about the nefarious acts of this outfit, and its attempts to throw the kitchen sink and all the dishes in it against doctors who question the vaccine narrative.”
Here is a quote from Dr. Thomas’ Amended Complaint in which he details the direct involvement of the Federation of State Medical Boards in the creation of the opioid crisis:
128. The Federation of State Medical Boards (“Federation”) is a secretive, private, and powerful organization located in Texas. The Federation is not transparent and is unaccountable to the public. The Federation claims to represent the state medical boards in the United States and support them. In fact, the Federation wields an enormous about of power over the practice of medicine in all 50 States.
129. The Federation is funded and controlled by big pharmaceutical companies. According to poll data, Big Pharma is the least trusted industry. The Federation serves to whitewash Big Pharma’s narrative and control the state medical boards to the benefit of Big Pharma. The Federation does the bidding of Big Pharma. For example, the Federation played a major role in the disastrous opiate crisis.
130. Led by Purdue Pharma, the maker of Oxycontin, opiate manufacturers gave almost $2 million to the Federation.During the time this money was pouring in, the Federation wrote new guidelines for opiate prescribing, in which it explained that what looked like addiction was not really addiction.
The guidelines included this statement: “Millions of Americans suffer from debilitating pain – a condition that, for some, can be relieved through the use of opioids.”
131. The Federation pressured medical boards to adopt the new guidelines. It created continuing medical education courses to teach doctors to prescribe more opioids to their patents. It sought to reassure doctors that following the new guidelines would reduce the likelihood of disciplinary action. Indeed, the Federation encouraged state medical boards to discipline doctors for the undertreatment of pain.
132. The Federation also promoted a book titled “Responsible Opioid Prescribing” based on its guidelines designed to encourage the broad use of opioids for non-terminal patients. The Federation encouraged the overprescribing and worsening of the opioid addiction. A four-fold increase in prescribing opioids was associated with a four-fold increase in opioid related overdose deaths.
133. The Federation was a primary purveyor of misinformation about opiates that caused a man-made epidemic of addition and death. The opioid epidemic was caused by an industry-funded campaign to encourage opioid prescribing in which the Federation had a prominent role.
134. The Federation promotes whatever is in the interests of Big Pharma. It is part of the cartel of entities that banded to together to falsely assert that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe, effective, and necessary. It labels as “misinformation” anything that would create public hesitancy in taking a vaccine, including childhood or COVID vaccines.
To the Federation, “misinformation” about vaccines represents any statement or scientific evidence that differs from the prevailing narrative of stakeholders who most stand to profit from vaccines. The Federation encourages state boards to discipline any doctor who shares information contrary to the benefit of the pharmaceutical companies.
135. The Federation has undue influence over the discipline of doctors by the state medical boards. It publishes the Guide to Medical Regulation in the United States. Guidance on physician discipline from the Federation become de facto requirements to state medical boards. The Federation publishes a quarterly journal titled “Journal of Medical Regulation.”
More detail from a 2012 article published by the Alliance for Natural Health: “the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and MedPage Today reported [in February 2012] that the FSMB asked for $100,000 from Big Pharma to help create and distribute the organization’s new policy on pain medication to their 700,000 practicing doctors. The federation won’t say how much money it received from industry, but estimated that it will cost $3.1 million for its campaign.”
“And what is this campaign? To get the word out about ‘safe’ use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of chronic pain! That’s right, FSMB’s new policy favors the use of opioids for long-term pain management, despite an epidemic of painkiller abuse and addiction (not to mention the terrible crime rates that accompany it) — and a lack of scientific support for this use of the drugs.”
“If you think drug manufacturers might be pleased to contribute to such a campaign, you would be right. The University of Wisconsin, with funding from Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, developed a continuing education course for doctors based on the FSMB’s manual.
Safe and effective, and by that they seemingly meant, “lucrative and addictive!”
War on Natural Medicine
According to the same 2012 overview by the Alliance for Natural Health:
“It seems that the FSMB was infiltrated in the late 1990s by the so-called “quackbuster” contingent — people openly hostile to complementary and alternative medicine. At the 1996 annual meeting of the FSMB in Chicago, there was a radical shift from a focus on health fraud as defined by the federal government (overbilling, un-bundling, and kickbacks) to another definition of health fraud: alternative medical care.
It seems a concerted effort to label innovation in health care — and especially any natural treatment that competes with an emphasis on drugs and surgery as the ideal for modern medicine — as mere ‘quackery.’”
“Since then, the FSMB has challenged integrative medicine as being outside the “standard of care,” defining the term to suit its own purposes; in this, the organization mirrors and amplifies the American Medical Association’s antipathy toward integrative medicine.
Because practicing outside the standard of care is grounds for a state medical board to revoke a doctor’s license, the attempt to exclude CAM therapies from the standard of care is a major threat to consumers’ access to integrative doctors.”
“If we used to be puzzled about the FSMB’s motives in attacking integrative medicine, this latest move has made it clear that a good part of it may just be about the money. Last Tuesday the article was published in 2012], the Senate Finance Committee launched an investigation into the close ties between pharmaceutical companies, the FSMB, and “nonprofit pain groups” like the American Pain Foundation.
The Foundation received 90 percent of its $5 million in funding in 2010 from the drug and medical device industry, and its guides for patients, journalists, and policymakers downplay the risks associated with opioid painkillers while exaggerating the benefits from the drugs.
Tuesday morning, two senators from the Finance Committee sent letters to the American Pain Foundation and four other pain nonprofits, three drug companies, and the FSMB, expressing concern about their relationship with each other. Tuesday evening, the Foundation announced that it would “cease to exist, effective immediately.” Coincidence?”
Earlier 1995, FSMB established a “Special Committee on Health Care Fraud” and issued a document that lamented the fact that people were taking their money to alternative health practitioners. In 1999, the committee’s name was changed to the “Special Committee on Questionable and Deceptive Health Care Practices.”
The 1995 Committee document below was eventually deleted from the FBSM website but an archived version is still available. In April 1997, FSMB’s governing body accepted this Report as policy. Quote:
“It has been estimated that up to $100 billion is lost to health care fraud in the United States annually.1 Medical interventions that do not conform to prevailing scientific standards are becoming increasingly popular. It is estimated that in 1990, Americans made 425 million visits to providers of “unconventional” medicine, exceeding the number of visits to all U.S. primary care physicians, at a cost of approximately $13.7 billion.
It may be recognized that some alternative therapies may be beneficial and therefore warrant further investigation and possible integration into mainstream medical practice. However, because of the lack of reliable scientific evidence and clinical validation, safety has not been established for most of these modalities.”
Their 2002 documentelaborates on the extended definition of “harm” that can come from their competitors — but not a peep about the harm that comes from their donors and sponsors. Here is how they estimate potential harm caused my “alternative” medicine:
Economic harm, which results in monetary loss but presents no health hazard;
Indirect harm, which results in a delay of appropriate treatment, or in unreasonable expectations that discourage patients and their families from accepting and dealing effectively with their medical conditions;
Direct harm, which results in adverse patient outcome
Greed and Arrogance: A Deadly Combo
As they say, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. Thus, today’s lamentable state of affairs is a combination of deliberate top-down racketeering with the purpose of getting rid of economic competition — and sincere ideological arrogance of people on the ground. Just one look at some of these old commercials makes it clear.
I would like to end this story with a 1947 DDT commercial. Shut your eyes and ears. Don’t think. Anything that comes from the Big Corporate Father is safe and effective!
About the Author
To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.
__________________
**Comment**
In case you believe this to be over the top, please know it’s happened before.
Organized medicine spent nearly a century and unknown millions trying to discredit and destroy chiropractic. Today the vestiges of suppression are still found that ignore the body of peer-reviewed research supporting chiropractic care.
In short, in 1976, Chester Wilk, D.C. and four other chiropractors (one later dropped out) filed suit against the AMA and codefendants such as the American Hospital Association, the American College of Surgeons, the American College of Physicians, and the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals for conspiring to destroy chiropractic.
In 1987, a federal appellate court judge ruled that the AMA had engaged in a “lengthy, systematic, successful and unlawful boycott” designed to restrict cooperation between MDs and chiropractors designed to eliminate the profession of chiropractic as a competitor in the US health care system.
The AMA offered a patient care defense; however, data from Workman’s Compensation Bureau studies served to validate chiropractic care. Specifically, studies comparing chiropractic care to care by a medical physician were presented which showed that chiropractors were “twice as effective as medical physicians, for comparable injuries, in returning injured workers to work at every level of injury severity.”
The settlement of the suit included an injunctive order in which the AMA was instructed to cease its efforts to restrict the professional association of chiropractors and AMA members. The AMA was also ordered to notify its 275,000 members of the court’s injunction. In addition, the American Hospital Association (AHA) sent out 440,000 separate notices to inform hospitals across the United States that the AHA has no objection to allowing chiropractic care in hospitals.
Since the court findings and conclusions were released, a growing number of medical doctors, hospitals, and health care organizations in the United States have begun including the services of chiropractors. Source
Monopolizing medicine has been going on for decades but has become extremely overt during the COVID ‘plandemic’. The FSMB and public health have become monolithic monsters. If the corrupt public health monopoly isn’t broken soon, independent doctors will become extinct which will spell doom for Lyme/MSIDS patients and other patients who don’t fit into an allopathic four-cornered box. Mainstream doctors have become little more than puppets who don’t actually practice medicine, but simply follow orders from a tyrannical task master. Three medical boards are currently being sued for threatening doctors who are critical of official positions on COVID policy. The outcome should concern everyone, but particularly Lyme/MSIDS patients who are forced to go outside mainstream medicine to get real help.
These independent doctors are our life-line and must be protected.
This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2022
Dozens of federal officials, along with senior social media executives, are finally being held accountable for colluding to suppress both the Constitutional and medical rights of US citizens. Could the as-of-yet unidentified ‘shadowy, foreign money group’ actors behind organizations such as the Center for Countering Digital Hate be next?
On March 21, 2021, a shadowy foreign group calling itself the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), published a document titled, “THE DISINFORMATION DOZEN: Why platforms must act on twelve leading online anti-vaxxers,” claiming that only 12 individuals are responsible for the majority of the anti-vaccine content online, namely, the document stated: “Just twelve anti-vaxxers are responsible for almost two-thirds of anti-vaccine content circulating on social media platforms.”
Since then, not only have thousands of news articles republished CCDH’s accusations, and used their document as justification to publicly defame, vilify and deplatform these individuals – including the White House press secretary, the U.S. Surgeon General, the President of the US, and 14 State Attorney Generals – but Facebook openly refuted CCDH’s statistics, both publicly in a statement given by their VP of Content Policy Monika Bickert on August 18th, and privately in an HHS email to a FB executive on August 8, 2021, proving them to be without any basis in fact.
Despite this, no apology or correction has been issued by CCDH, nor have any of hundreds of media outlets published a retraction of their defamatory statements. Furthermore, government officials who accused myself, and the other named individuals and organizations of egregious acts, including violence, have not issued any statement reflective of the new evidence that has been provided.
To the contrary, Homeland Security has issued National Terrorism Advisory System bulletins indicating that anyone who openly questions COVID vaccine safety or efficacy may now be classifed as a domestic terrorist. Until the origin lies, defamation, and depravation of rights we experience are openly addressed and remedied, many millions more Americans will likely face similar treatment, which may include warrantless surveillance, unjustified censorship, and perhaps more egregious sactions such as debanking (which I have personnally experienced since being targeted via Paypal and Venmo).
The good news, however, is that two new lawsuits are now shedding light on the actual disinformation agents behind the campaign to defame US citizens, such as myself, for exercising our First Amendment rights, and the right to informed consent. These include dozens of federal officials and senior social media employees who colluded, behind the scenes, to suppress the free speech of US citizens in such a way that it directly violated their access to information required for informed consent – a medical ethical principle established as a direct result of the Nuremburg trials in an international effort to prevent future medical atrociticies from ever happening again.
(See link for the evidence the lawsuits have brought forth)
An update on the lawsuit reveals that states are seeking to depose Fauci and other officials in the Big Tech-Government censorship case.
Madison Area Lyme Support Group 