Jerry Leonard discusses Lyme Disease, bioweapons, and the connections to eugenics. He also delves into the manifestations of these tactics in our current global psychological and biological warfare operation.
Most frightening of all is the creation of a new NIH which will merge national security with health security modeled after DARPA. (Hopefully you can see where this is going, if not, read this).
Universities are involved in an unholy alliance with Big Pharma, the government, and mainstream media as they receive royalties(disingenuously classified as “federal compensation” rather than “outside income”)when they market patented technologies, yet taxpayers continue paying universities for research.
Many NIH scientists routinely fail to disclose royalty payments – one of whom is Fauci,the highest paid federal employee.
Researchers in academia obtain money from the government.Dr. Fauci, holds the keys to the coffer. Hopefully by now it is evident to all that he is one of the most corrupt individuals on the planet and he will do whatever it takes to get what he wants – lie, cover up, deny, and hide. He is not only behind the COVID debacle, but the Lyme debacle as well.
Until we demand transparency and for public health to be devoid of ties to Big Pharma, Big Tech, the media, and research institutions we will never get the truth.
COVID has brought much of this dirt into the light; however, it’s been going on for decades. Lyme/MSIDS patients and the doctors who dare treat them have had to walk this pot-holed riddle path and deal with the censorship, denial, and bullying.
Unfortunately, many Lyme patients and advocacy groups continue to work with the very same corrupt individuals and organizations. That’s essentially asking the pot to call the kettle black. It just isn’t gonna happen. I’ve said this before, but it’s worth repeating: the only forward progress made in Lymeland is by independentresearchers who do not vie for government grants.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said on March 13 that a fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccine would be necessary, claiming it would continue to reduce hospitalizations.
“Clearly, we are not where we would all like to be, which is [where] COVID is behind us,” Bourla told CBS News. “I think that right now, we have very significant tools in our hands so that we can go gradually, I think, back to our normal lives. But we need to understand that the COVID will not go away in the years to come.”
Saying Americans would have to figure out “how to live” with the virus, Bourla then claimed it was likely people would have to get yearly COVID-19 boosters. (See link for article)
____________________
SUMMARY:
Bourla admits COVID shot protection doesn’t last long.
He provides no evidence or data for any claims of COVID shot efficacy.
He doesn’t mention natural immunity at all.
He doesn’t discuss mandates or passport systems in light of the fact the shots don’t work.
Pfizer has profited significantly ($37 billion in the last year)
This hums right along with what an FDA exec said: Biden’s plan to inject as many as possible.
The FDA exec also said: “Almost a billion a year is going into the FDA’s budget from the people we regulate.”
It was also just discovered that HHS has paid the media $1 BILLION to promote COVID shots. This explains the montage of media outlets stating the exact same things. What’s “extremely dangerous to our democracy” is news outlets stating the exact same things and being paid by Big Pharma and the government.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla tried distancing himself from the COVID mRNA vaccines on Friday, suggesting he only developed the “counterintuitive” technology under pressure from colleagues.
“When you and your colleague were trying to decide which route to go down: the traditional vaccine route or the mRNA route. You write that it was ‘most counterintuitive’ to go the mRNA route. And yet, you went that route. Explain why,” Capehart said.
Bourla explained the mRNA decision “was counterintuitive because Pfizer was mastering- or let’s say we had very good experience and expertise with multiple technologies that could give a vaccine, and the Novartis that some of the vaccines are, we were very good in doing that. Protein vaccines, we were very good in doing that and plus many other technologies.”
Albert Bourla CEO of Pfizer, on why mRNA vaccine was counterintuitive. “I was surprised when they suggested to me that this was the way to go, and I questioned it.”pic.twitter.com/xs786HPTwb
— CensoredThinkerFitness (@CensoredThinker) March 11, 2022
“mRNA was a technology, but we had less experience, only two years working on this, and actually, mRNA was a technology that never delivered a single product until that day, not vaccine, not any other medicine,” Bourla admitted.
“So it was very counterintuitive, and I was surprised when they suggested to me that this is the way to go, and I questioned it,” he continued. “And I asked them to justify how can you say something like that, but they came, and they were very, very convinced that this is the right way to go.”
“They felt that the two years of work on mRNA since 2018 together with BioNTech to develop the flu vaccine made them believe that the technology is mature and we are at the cusp of delivering a product.”
“So they convinced me. I followed my instinct that they know what they are saying. They are very good, and we made this very difficult decision at that time,” he added.
Bourla also admitted that despite pushing the “more risky” mRNA technology on the public, Pfizer felt it had “all the features required” to combat the COVID pandemic.
CAPEHART: And is it‑‑the thing about mRNA is that because it’s synthetic, it reduces the amount of time? It makes it a lot easier to readjust, reedit, refit to whatever virus you’re trying to make a vaccine for or trying to address?
BOURLA: You’re absolutely right. This is one of the many benefits that the technology brings. So the reason why they were suggesting something that was more risky clearly than the others was because of the many benefits if we were successful. We analyzed very well and knew that we are in a pandemic. And it is eventually possible that we will now see many new variants coming up. So we wanted to have a technology that if there is a need to adopt to the vaccine, we’ll be able to do it very quickly, and mRNA can do in weeks what other technologies require months.
And the second thing is that we wanted to be able to use a technology that will not limit abilities to boost immune responses with additional injections if there is a need, and mRNA is very good in that. Unlike, for example, adenoviruses, there are issues when you try to do a second or third dose. That creates issues.
So, for this and many other reasons, we selected to go with something that was clearly more risky, but if we were successful, it looked like it has all the features that are required to fight a pandemic in an expedient manner and in a mass scale.
Instead of taking credit for developing the mRNA technology, Bourla appears to be distancing himself from the decision to pursue mRNA vaccines, instead foisting responsibility to his “colleagues.”
Bourla then also suggested the vaccine was rendered ineffective due to the mild Omicron variant, and said that “annual revaccinations” is the “ultimate goal.”
“I felt and I had expressed that conviction that with a third shot, we should be able to get immune protection that will last for a year, and then we should be able to move to annual revaccinations, which is the ultimate goal,” Bourla said.
Notably, Bayer Pharmaceuticals Division President Stefan Oelrich admitted during the World Health Summit last November that a global pandemic was necessary to convince the world’s population to submit themselves to experimental mRNA technology injections.
“I always like to say: if we had surveyed two years ago in the public – ‘would you be willing to take a gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body?’ – we probably would have had a 95% refusal rate,” Oelrich confessed, adding, “I think this pandemic has opened many people’s eyes to innovation.”
Pfizer, FDA Hid Data Showing Clinical Trials Failed, Says Former BlackRock Advisor
In an interview with Naomi Wolf, former BlackRock investment advisor Edward Dowd explained why Wall Street lost faith in Pfizer and Moderna stocks when Pfizer and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration tried to hide clinical trial data.
In an interview with Naomi Wolf, of the Daily Clout, investment advisor Edward Dowd discussed why investors are dumping COVID-19 vaccine makers’ stocks.
Dowd, a former managing director with BlackRock from 2002 to 2012, grew BlackRock’s growth strategy from $2 billion-$14 billion over 10 years.
Wolf introduced Dowd:
“He’s the extraordinarily kind of courageous, well-informed whistleblower who has come forward to explain to audiences why in his view, Pfizer has committed a fraud.”
Dowd described how his initial caution about taking the experimental COVID vaccine led him to research data related to Pfizer’s clinical trials.
Dowd told Wolf:
“I learned from a friend in the biotech industry that Pfizer had failed its all-cause mortality endpoint in the initial trial … All-cause mortality is the gold standard in any drug trial at the FDA. When you fail that endpoint, the drug is not approved.”
When Big Pharma and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were unwilling to release vaccine safety data, Dowd grew even more skeptical about the vaccines, he said, and was compelled to speak out privately and publicly about what he believed was a major deception:
“I got more loud about fraud when the FDA decided to hide the clinical data for 75 years. I’m an investor, so let me just say how I think about the world. I don’t wait for people to tell me what just happened. My job was to come up with an analysis, mosaic and investment thesis, and then over time I’d be proven right.
“So I don’t wait for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal or The Washington Post to tell me anything. Because by the time that happens, the opportunity to make money is lost. So I started screaming fraud as soon as I saw that — because it’s unprecedented to hide data from the public.”
It was a report from the CEO of a major life insurance company that confirmed Dowd’s doubts:
“If this vaccine was as deadly and injurious as we thought, we’d see the insurance companies and the funeral home results. These are databases that aren’t being hidden from us by the government. So, unfortunately, in early January, a signal was launched by One America.
“The CEO didn’t really know what he was saying or the implications of it — because he didn’t think it was the vaccine, but he got on a Chamber of Commerce call in Indiana, and he said that in the second half of 2021, he was seeing a 40% increase in all-cause mortality — non-COVID. And to put some meat on those bones, a 10% increase he said would be a three-standard deviation [increase], which in math in my world is a big deal.”
Dowd described the impact on the financial world and on his current work:
“Wall Street is listening to me now because they’re nervous and a lot of them are jabbed as well. And if you look at the stocks of Moderna and Pfizer, Moderna is down 70% and Pfizer is down 20 plus percent.
“So my goal has been to raise consciousness across the country and the globe, by pointing out that even though the mainstream media is not going to save us — and it doesn’t seem like the politicians or the regulators are, because they’re in on it — we have to spread the word.”
Wolf asked Dowd about the repercussions of his public position:
“One of the things you’ve said, unequivocally, not mincing words — this is fraud. So if you are not right, that’s actionable, I believe, and Pfizer and Moderna could come at you with a libel suit or a slander suit. But I believe that has not happened yet. Will you speak to that?”
Dowd replied:
“I don’t have a medical license to take away. I don’t have a bar license to take away. I’m an investor. And throughout the history of Wall Street, investors have what we call a thesis. So I present this as a thesis — I’m a hundred percent convinced it’s fraud. I’ve laid out my case and it’s starting to appear, it’s coming to light that it is, but I can say this is freedom of speech. They can sue me if they want. I don’t suspect they will.”
Dowd said he’s been waiting for a “hit piece on me,” but there haven’t been any yet. He said because what he’s presenting is an investment thesis, he’s protected under free speech laws.
“Here’s the problem, Dowd said. “The proof of the fraud is showing up in real-life results. And that is becoming undeniable and impossible to hide.”
Children in China Diagnosed With Leukemia After Taking Chinese Vaccines
By Eva Fu
March 11, 2022Updated: March 13, 2022
After receiving her first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, Li Jun’s 4-year-old developed a fever and coughs, which quickly subsided after intravenous therapy at the hospital. But after the second shot, the father could tell something was wrong.
Swelling appeared around his daughter’s eyes and did not go away. For weeks, the girl complained about pains on her legs, where bruises started to emerge seemingly out of nowhere. In January, a few weeks after the second dose, the 4-year-old was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
“My baby was perfectly healthy before the vaccine dose,” Li (an alias), from China’s north-central Gansu Province, told The Epoch Times. “I took her for a health check. Everything was normal.”
He is among hundreds of Chinese that belong to a social media group claiming to be suffering from or have a household member suffering from leukemia, developed after taking Chinese vaccines. Eight of them confirmed the situation when reached by The Epoch Times. Names of the interviewees have been withheld to protect their safety. (See link for article)
___________________
Important quote:
“Our doctor from the hospital told us that since November, the children coming to their hematology division to treat leukemia have doubled the previous years’ number and they are having a shortage of beds,” he said.
Similarly to censorship in the U.S., these parents are ignored and bullied. The police showed up, fabricated things, and ordered the parents to withdraw from the chat group, and the details of over 200 leukemia patients, filled out by group members, is no longer accessible.
HHS is far from alone. Local, national media also paid MILLIONS to push COVID shots.
“We have just lived through the most expensive propaganda campaign in the history of the world and it was paid for with taxpayer dollars. You paid for it, I paid for it.” ~ Emerald Robinson, former Newsmax reporter
Besides using bribery, investigative journalist Roger Charles has exposed the FBI’s“Sensitive Informant Program,” putting informants in the national media and other institutions supposedly to root out corruption, however:
“It is not a case of someone coming to the FBI offering to expose corruption. The bureau is recruiting spies.” ~ Jesse Trentadue, attorney
A recently released scathing, but heavily redacted, internal FBI audit found special agents breaking their own rules more than twice per reviewed case when investigating sensitive institutions. Other records suggest that the FBI used reporters as sources of information. Charles is also researching if the FBI has informants in the courts, Congress, media, and other government agencies. He argues that the court must decide whether FOIA exemptions advanced by the FBI for withholding portions of the FBI Manual apply, and if they do, can those exemptions be lawfully asserted to conceal unconstitutional and/or illegal activities. The journalist has also uncovered undercover right-wing infiltration operations and previously hidden databases.
Some lawmakers are rightly questioning the bureau’s sweeping powers.
This historical lesson states that the CIA used to infiltrate the media but that now it IS the media. For decades it has planted news stories in the media and continues on unabated.
The following media outlets received HHS funding to peddle COVID jabs (your tax dollars at work):
ABC
CBS
NBC
Fox News
CNN
MSNBC
The New York Post
The Los Angeles Times
Washington Post
Buzzfeed News
Newsmax
hundreds of local newspapers and TV stations
The HHS is tasked with ensuring “vaccine” safety. How on earth can they do this AND bribe media outlets to peddle COVID shots by only reporting positive findings?
This video shows clip after clip of news outlets stating the EXACT SAME THINGS. Now we know why. They were all paid and told what to say. This even made the NY Times. And this montage shows how every commercial during the plandemic is also eerily the same.
It’s not supply and demand, it’s supply and de(mandate)
Bret Weinstein PdD
March 14, 2022
Weinstein states that public health typically oversimplifies things to get you to do the “right” thing. He calls these “noble lies,” however, COVID has shown that the current lies are corrupt lies, which have resulted in massive amounts of money going to those with vested interests. These companies are using the government to coerce the use of their products. We need to be hyper vigilant that what we are being told is NOT in our best interest.
Seems everyone is picking sides these days based on a simplistic accepted narrative. Pfizer says it will stop clinical trials in Russia and donate all of its profits from the country to humanitarian aid efforts in Ukraine. (The Hill)
One of the primary vehicles for kickbacks and fraud seems to be foundations associated with federal agencies. The reason they’re so frequently used for questionable transactions is because foundations are private entities and not subject to Freedom of Information Act requests and other open records laws
The board of directors of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) is heavily populated with Big Pharma players. This raises serious questions about conflicts of interest, as the foundation oversees the distribution of hundreds of millions of dollars — unregulated funds that typically go right back into the coffers of the drug industry
This conflict of interest also, at least in part, helps explain the actions of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and now-retired director of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins.Both have gone out of their way to protect the makers of COVID shots and dismiss evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was created in and escaped from a lab
Dr. Julie Gerberding became the FNIH CEO March 1, 2022. She was formerly director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. After leaving the CDC, she became the executive vice president of strategic communications at Merck
The FNIH’s board of directors includes seven current or former drug company executives, the FDA, the Sackler family (notorious for its creation of a deadly opioid epidemic), Johns Hopkins (co-sponsor of Event 201, which “predicted” COVID-19 and the subsequent destruction of human rights), and two major investment bankers, Goldman Sachs and BlackRock
One of the primary vehicles for kickbacks and fraud seems to be foundations associated with federal agencies. This article will highlight and expose yet another way we are being conned and manipulated by examining the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health1 (FNIH), whose board is plastered with major Big Pharma players.
This raises serious questions about conflicts of interest, seeing how the foundation oversees the distribution of hundreds of millions of dollars — unregulated funds that typically go right back into the coffers of the drug industry. It’s a very clever strategy to extract even more funds from the American taxpayers.
This conflict of interest also, at least in part, helps explain the actions of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and now-retired director of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins.2 Both have gone out of their way to protect the makers of COVID shots and dismiss evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was created in and escaped from a lab.
FNIH Board — A Who’s Who of Big Pharma
In 2020, Fauci received the FNIH’s Charles A. Sanders MD Partnership Award for his leadership and support of “FNIH programs propelling research in lethal infectious diseases.”3
Dr. Charles Sanders was the FNIH chairman between 1996 and 2016. Before that, he was the chairman and CEO of Glaxo Inc. He also spent eight years with Squibb Corp., where he held several positions, including CEO of the Science and Technology Group.4 He’s currently a member of the FNIH board of directors.
In the video above, Fauci is interviewed by Dr. Freda Lewis-Hall about his career, his achievements and the public-private partnerships that allowed for the creation of Operation Warp Speed and the rapid deployment of a COVID-19 jab. Lewis-Hall is a former chief medical officer and executive vice president at Pfizer. She is also a current board member of the FNIH.
Another striking member of the FNIH’s board is Dr. Julie Gerberding. If you have a sharp memory for details, you may recall she served as director of the CDC from 2002 to 2009.
After resigning from the CDC, she entered the express revolving door between industry and government and was hired by Merck as their vice president in charge of vaccines. Imagine that — the head of the government agency responsible for policing vaccines is hired by one of the world’s largest producers of vaccines.
Sadly, it’s all perfectly legal. Later, she oversaw global public policy and strategic communications at Merck, followed by a position as chief patient officer and executive vice president for population health and sustainability.5 Gerberding has now taken her nefarious behavior to an entirely new level. She’s slid back through yet another revolving door and is the CEO of FNIH as of March 1, 2022.6 Other FNIH board members include:
Chairman Dr. Steven Paul, CEO and chairman of Karuna Therapeutics
Marijn Dekkers, Ph.D., chairman of Novalis LifeSciences
Paul Herrling, Ph.D., chairman for the Novartis Institute for Tropical Diseases
Dr. Paul Stoffels, vice chairman of the executive committee and chief scientific officer for Johnson & Johnson
Jillian Sackler, president and CEO of the Dame Jillian and Dr. Arthur M. Sackler Foundation for the Arts, Sciences and Humanities
Dr. Elias Zerhouni, Professor Emeritus, Johns Hopkins University
James Donovan, a Goldman Sachs partner
Russel Steenberg, managing director and global head of BlackRock Private Equity Partners
The two non-voting directors are Collins and Dr. Stephen Hahn, the current commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. This is quite the list.
We’ve got seven current or former drug company executives, the CDC, the FDA, the Sackler family (notorious for its creation of a deadly opioid epidemic), Johns Hopkins (co-sponsor of Event 201, which “predicted” COVID-19 and the subsequent destruction of human rights), and two major investment bankers, Goldman Sachs and BlackRock.
The inclusion of BlackRock is particularly interesting, and disturbing, considering they have a hidden monopoly on global asset holdings. Together with Vanguard, BlackRock has ownership in some 1,600 American firms, which in 2015 had combined revenues of $9.1 trillion. If you add in the third-largest global asset holder, State Street, their combined ownership encompasses nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms.7Just what is BlackRock doing on the FNIH’s board of directors?
Who Funds the FNIH?
Then there are the donors. The largest donor to the FNIH is none other than Bill Gates. According to the FNIH’s 2020 statutory report,8 The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donated $96,981,262 that year, accounting for 15% of the Foundation’s annual revenue.9
In 2019, the Gates Foundation’s contribution of $49,827,480 accounted for 35% of the annual revenue.10,11,12As the top donor, it’s not farfetched to assume Gates might have significant leverage over the direction of the foundation and its funds. GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and Wellcome also donated between $5 million and $10 million each in 2020.13 FNIH programs funded by the Gates Foundation include but are not limited to:
Combining Epitope Based Vaccine Design with Informatics-Based Evaluation
Global collaborative for Coordination of Gene Drive Research and Development
The Partnership to Accelerate Novel TB Regimens
mRNA encoded HIV Env-Gag Virus-like-particle Vaccines
The last program on the list — the creation of novel mRNA-based HIV vaccines — is described14 as a project to “test a new HIV vaccine concept in animals using noninfectious ‘virus-like particles’ encoded by an RNA vaccine with the goal of inducing protective antibody responses.”
The initial request for collaboration came from the NIAID at the end of July 2020. In August 2020, the FNIH Portfolio Oversight Committee approved the project, “contingent upon a commitment of full funding in the amount of $1.45 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.”
The Gates Foundation fulfilled that commitment in October 2020. A memorandum of understanding between the FNIH and the NIAID was finalized in early 2021. A sub-award was granted to the University of Montreal (CHUM), and Bioqual was given a service agreement to manage the clinical trial.
Bill Gates also contributes to the FNIH through Gates Ventures,15 a rapidly growing venture capital and investment firm that works side by side with the Gates Foundation’s program teams “to identify investment opportunities.”16 Specifically, Gates Ventures is an organizational donor to the FNIH’s Biomarkers Consortium (BC), a cancer steering committee, alongside a long list of drug companies.
Congress Seeks Greater Transparency
As mentioned earlier, all of this can help explain Fauci’s and Collins’ behavior during the COVID pandemic. Collins is a board member, Fauci got the foundation’s top reward for support in 2020, and money flows into the foundation from drug companies and Gates, all of whom have vested interests in making sure that whatever the NIH does and recommends to the public, it will produce profits for them.
According to its 2020 Statutory Report,17 the FNIH has raised more than $1.2 billion, and as mentioned earlier, most of that money goes right back to the drug industry, without Congressional appropriation or oversight. While the whole thing reeks of conflicts of interest, it may be difficult to get to the bottom of because, as a 501c3, the FNIH is cleverly exempt from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
Nonprofits are considered private entities, and therefore not subject to FOIA and other open records laws.18,19 However, the NIH is subject to FOIA since it’s a government agency, and the funds raised go to the NIH. Basically, it’s a system set up to bypass oversight, and the U.S. Congress is responsible for creating this fraud-fraught system.
Congress Created This Fraud-Fraught System
Congress is responsible for the oversight of federal agencies, but in the early 1990s, it created what sure looks like a pay-to-play system. Not only did Congress create the FNIH, they also set up the CDC Foundation,20 which funnels millions of dollars from drug companies and vaccine makers into the CDC.21
This explains the CDC’s highly irrational and harmful COVID recommendations. The fact that the CDC lies about its pharma funding only makes it all the more suspicious. The CDC has long fostered the perception of independence by stating it does not accept funding from special interests.
In disclaimers peppered throughout the CDC’s website22 and in its publications, it says the agency “does not accept commercial support” and has “no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products.” With the information exposed in this article it is obvious that this is a cleverly obfuscated pack of lies — all possible through sheer semantics, as the funds are diverted through the foundation rather than going straight to the CDC.
In 2019, several watchdog groups — including the U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), Public Citizen, Knowledge Ecology International, Liberty Coalition and the Project on Government Oversight — petitioned23 the CDC to stop making these false disclaimers24 because, in reality, the CDC receives millions of dollars each year from commercial interests through its government-chartered foundation, the CDC Foundation, which funnels those contributions to the CDC after deducting a fee.25
On the CDC Foundation’s website, you’ll find a long list26 of “corporate partners” that have provided the CDC with funding over the years. The CDC even accepts money earmarked for specific studies or programs aimed at expanding corporate profits or reducing drug companies’ liability exposure.27
As just one example, in 2018, Collins ended up canceling a $100 million study to assess the effects of moderate alcohol consumption after it was discovered that the NIH had inappropriately solicited money for the study directly from the spirits industry, and had designed the study “to satisfy industry interests.”28 Collins also had to ditch a $400 million study into opioid dependency after an independent panel warned there were potential conflicts of interest.29
In 2018, a congressional spending panel also warned the FNIH and the CDC Foundation that their disclosures of financial donations were inadequate. As reported by Science at the end of June 2018:30
“Congress created the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) and the CDC Foundation … to raise private funds to support federal biomedical and health research.
It hoped to encourage transparency and prevent potential conflicts of interest by specifying in the law that the foundations had to report ‘the source and amount of all gifts’ they receive, as well as any restrictions on how the donations could be used.
But last week, legislators on the House of Representatives appropriations subcommittee that oversees NIH and CDC expressed concern that the foundations may not be following those disclosure rules …
A report accompanying a 2019 spending bill moving through Congress reminds the foundations to abide by the PHSA when writing their annual reports … The lawmakers also say it’s not OK to hide the identity of donors who have attached strings to their gift by labeling them as ‘anonymous.’
The language ‘is a marker that we want more transparency,’ says one House appropriations staffer, speaking on background because of committee rules on who can speak to the press. ‘We’d like to see [the foundations] go further, and this language is meant to start a conversation.’”
Among “anonymous” donors to the FNIH in 2016 were the Gates Foundation, despite having given a sizeable $19.1 million grant.31 While the financial statements of these foundations may have improved since 2018, the system itself, which gives private industry the power to influence regulatory agencies through unregulated funding, remains unchanged.
Globalists Aim to Take Over Health Systems Worldwide
The reason for having a BlackRock representative on the FNIH’s board of directors could potentially have something to do with the globalists’ plan to monopolize health systems worldwide — a plan that is taking shape as we speak.
In June 2021, Gerberding, now head of the FNIH, wrote a Time article32 laying out the framework for an international pandemic-surveillance network, which would include threat prediction and preemption as well. While Gerberding did not name the World Health Organization, we now know that’s the organization designated as the top-down ruler, not only of all things related to pandemics but also health in general. I’ll have an entire article detailing this in tomorrow’s newsletter.
It’s important to realize that unless we can somehow prevent the WHO from acquiring this power, it will be able to dictate things like mandatory vaccinations and health passports moving forward, and its dictates would supersede all national and state laws. We simply cannot let this happen.
At the same time, we need to realize just how bought and paid for our U.S. regulatory agencies are, and figure out a way to clean up that mess. There’s been a revolving door between government and private industry for decades, which is how we got here in the first place. Closing that door might be a first step in the right direction, but it’s not going to be enough by itself.
The NIH, CDC and the Food and Drug Administration are all so thoroughly infiltrated by industry, restoring them to their intended functions is no easy task. Disturbingly, the same technocratic powers that are working to give the WHO global power over global health have also infiltrated these U.S. agencies. As a result, they’re unlikely to push back. They’re going to be more than willing to take orders from the WHO.
Massachusetts to Reduce ‘Significant Overcount’ of COVID-19 Deaths
By Harry Lee
March 11, 2022Updated: March 11, 2022
The Massachusetts Public Health Department announced Thursday that the state would lower its COVID-19 death count by 3,700 due to new measuring criteria being implemented. (See link for article)
Important quote:
“Our approach proved to be too expansive and led to a significant overcount of deaths in Massachusetts,” Public Health Commissioner Margret Cooke told the State House News Service.
As of March 9, Massachusetts reported 23,732 confirmed and probable COVID-19 deaths since the pandemic. The figure will drop to around 20,000 on March 14, when the department starts using the new criteria.
That’s roughly about 15 percent of the total death toll.
DeSantis, Medical Panel Voice Concerns Over Lockdowns, Lack of Trust Post COVID-19
By Jannis Falkenstern
March 8, 2022Updated: March 8, 2022
PUNTA GORDA, Florida–Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis met with 11 medical professionals in West Palm Beach on March 7 to evaluate the past two years of lockdowns and mandates and their effect on society, at a live virtual event co-hosted by the state surgeon general Dr. Joseph Ladapo. (See link for article)
SUMMARY:
The panel made up of medical professionals from private practice to academia from all over the U.S. agreed on the following:
two years of mandates and lockdowns did little to deter the virus
there is now a lack of trust in the medical establishment and the CDC due to politicization
we should never forget the overarching government abuse of powers, data, as well as the dishonesty, and unethical behavior
the gov. & medical agencies should be held accountable. If we forget, it can happen again.
The government has invested over a billion dollars in marketing vaccines to citizens.
government spending estimates for the development and manufacturing of COVID shots are between $18 billion and $23 billion.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the Biomedical Research and Development Authority (BARDA) alone has spent $19.3 billion on COVID-19 shot development.
In addition, Lisa Cornish projected $39.5 billion in US spending.
In 2021, over $10 billion was gained by just 8 share-holders of Pfizer & Moderna.
Physicians have been heavily criticized, censored, fired, and banned for even speaking of early treatments. The FDA has had an active role in this, and the Feds are giving tech companies until May, 2022 to rat-out those engaging in “misinformation.”
Hospitals receive payments for testing every patient for COVID, every COVID diagnosis and every ‘COVID death,’ as well as any time they use remdesivir and mechanical ventilation.
Early on in the COVID pandemic, people suspected that the deaths attributed to the infection were exaggerated. There was plenty of evidence for this. For starters, hospitals were instructed and incentivized to mark any patient who had a positive COVID test and subsequently died within a certain time period as a COVID death.
At the same time, we knew that the PCR test was unreliable, producing inordinate amounts of false positives. Now, the truth is finally starting to come out and, as suspected, the actual death toll is vastly lower than we were led to believe.
COVID Deaths Have Been Vastly Overcounted
In the video below, Dr. John Campbell reviews recent data released by the U.K. government in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. (See link for article)
Freedom of Information Discussion with Dr. John Campbell
____________________
SUMMARY:
UK health secretary admitted daily figures are unreliable as people continue to die from things unrelated to COVID but are included due to a positive test.
40% of patients counted as hospitalized COVID cases were not even admitted due to COVID symptoms. They simply tested positive.
Of the 17,371 who had COVID-19 as the sole cause of death, 13,597 were 65 or older. The average age of death in the U.K. from COVID in 2021 was 82.5 years. The projected life expectancy in the U.K. is 79 for men and 82.9 for women. This hardly constitutes an emergency, least of all for healthy school- and working-age individuals.
Campell shows excess cancer deaths due to delayed diagnosis and inability to get treatment due to lockdowns.
US data suggest a similar pattern of exaggerated COVID death statistics. CDC’s Walensky stated that 77.8% of people who had received the COVID jab yet died from/with COVID also had, on average, four comorbidities. She admitted that the risk of death is only for the sickest among us, whether you are ‘vaccinated’ or not.
A 2020 study found 88% of hospitalized COVID patients in New York City had two or more comorbidities,6.3% had one underlying health condition and 6.1% had none.This was before COVID shots.
CDC 2020 data showed only 6% of the total death count had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death. The remaining 94% had had an average of 2.6 comorbidities or preexisting health conditions that contributed to their deaths.
Most COVID deaths were likely due to ventilator malpractice:
80% of COVID-19 patients in NYC who were placed on ventilators died
66% of ventilated COVID patients died in the U.K.
86% of ventilated patients in Wuhan died
Despite this, mechanical ventilation is “standard of care” to this day
There are numerous safe alternatives to ventilation including:
Hyperbaric oxygen treatment
nasal cannulas – which are noninvasive
prone positioning, a technique where patients lay on their stomachs to aid breathing
UChicago Medicine found that combining proning and high-flow nasal cannulas brought patient oxygen levels from around 40% to 80% and 90%
The article states that for breathing difficulties, proning can be used at home and to try to avoid spending a lot of time lying flat on your back
US hospitals lose federal funding if they administer treatments that are not “approved.” They also receive incentives for the following:
COVID testing for all patients
COVID diagnoses
Admitting a “COVID patient”
Use of remdesivir (which has been shown to cause severe organ damage)
Use of mechanical ventilation
COVID deaths (coroners are also given bonuses)
Hospitals have also waived patient rights making them prisoners of the hospital.
Renz and a team of data analysts have estimated that more than 800,000 deaths in America’s hospitals, in COVID-19 and other patients, have been caused by approaches restricting fluids, nutrition, antibiotics, effective antivirals, anti-inflammatories, and therapeutic doses of anti-coagulants.
Renz showed CMS data from Texas hospitals which showed 84.9% % of all patients died after more than 96 hours on a ventilator.
Mercola states you should have what you need on hand when symptoms arise and that it’s always best to treat COVID symptoms immediately and aggressively. For example:
Madison Area Lyme Support Group 