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.
A new study has found that Pfizer’s Paxlovid COVID-19 pill causes adverse reactions in patients, including deadly blood clots.
(planet-today) Pfizer’s Paxlovid, which contains the drugs nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (NMVr), interacts with several other drugs routinely used to treat cardiovascular disease, according to a study published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology on Wednesday.
Thegatewaypundit.com reports: Most of the concerns about drug interactions come from ritonavir, experts said.
“Co-administration of NMVr with medications commonly used to manage cardiovascular conditions can potentially cause significant drug-drug interactions and may lead to severe adverse effects,” according to the reviewed paper.
Paxlovid can cause serious health problems when coupled with common heart disease medication such as statins and blood thinners.
Researchers from Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Harvard Medical School and other US institutions found the Covid drug can increase the risk of developing blood clots when taken with blood thinners.
It can also cause an irregular heartbeat when combined with drugs for heart pain and when taken alongside statins it can be toxic to the liver.
Dozens of medications such as aspirin are safe to take with Paxlovid, the researchers stress. But doctors need to be aware that other drugs can be dangerous and should be discontinued or adjusted while a patient is being treated for Covid.
(See link for article)
_________________
**Comment**
Per usual, the problem is the drug was not tested adequately before being rushed to market – just like all the COVID jabs and anything else with emergency use authorization (EUA). Meanwhile, common, inexpensive drugs like HCQ and ivermectin – used safely for decades are censored and banned because they are not the chosen drugs of our corrupt public health authorities who have vested interests in expensive, ineffective, and dangerous drugs they all profit from. It’s really quite that simple.
The study author admits that what is being learned about Paxlovid is what’s happening in the real world to actual patients – not from carefully controlled studies that should have been done. In other words, YOU are the Guinea Pig.
Corrupt public health authorities have successfully used propaganda to vilify safe, effective, cheap, highly used drugs and then turn around and downplay and ignore potentially life-threatening reactions that can occur when using many common medications with their chosen expensive, ineffective, toxic treatments of Paxlovid and Remdesivir, aka “Run Death is Near.”
And then there’s the fact more and more patients taking Paxlovid experience a rebound effect – or becoming infected with COVID shortly after using the drug and supposedly recovering.
But this is the new normal in the Topsy turvy world of COVID.
GBN News (Britain) interviews Laura Dodsworth, author of A State of Fear and she states people have had their “fingers in their ears” as the seemingly “new” news that the COVID shots do not protect against transmission was in the actual trial data and Peter Doshi wrote about it in the BMJ. The shots weren’t tested for reduction in hospitalization, death, or transmission, rather they were tested for reduction in severe symptoms – which is not the proper endpoint for “vaccine” efficacy.
Dosworth points out the extremely polarizing message: on one hand Disney & Marvel are pushing the jabs while on the other side of the country a highly respected medic states “we don’t recommend them.”
An important detail was mentioned: “vaccination” decisions are personal and should be respected.
Another important takeaway:
“there should be zero [COVID] measures ever again.”
We have up to two years’ worth of data on most of the measures, and NONE has proven fruitful.
The global response has been nothing short of disastrous, and following the same playbook is insanity.
Kim Iversen poked holes in the arguments given by many to vilify the unvaccinated. She points out the COVID shots waning immunity as well as breakthrough infections(infections in those who were were “vaccinated”)
Pro-Mandate Covidians Try to Rewrite History and Pretend Their Views Changed With “The Science”
Oct. 12, 2022
This article is a good read regarding the new phenomenon of those waking up to the mRNA shots causing adverse reactions. The author states there are three types of people and they should be handled differently:
Average citizens who complied but are now starting to realize getting the shots was a mistake. They are interested in learning about long-term ramifications. These people deserve compassion and patience.
Those who were incentivizedto be pro-“vaccine,” such as health care professionals, pharmaceutical professionals, and politicians. These people made very poor and dangerous decisions and were selfish and opportunistic. While not necessarily evil, they should not be given a free pass. History proves many will do anything to keep their job, power, or money. Our government and professional groups are guilty of forcing people to choose an injection over bodily autonomy. Shame on them.
Celebrities, journalists, and influencers who had no incentive to push the jabs but did so anyway. This group should never be trusted again. Some in this group were incentivized as well. The dangling carrot is very persuasive.
Welcome, to the real world. So you just heard it from the horse’s mouth, Pfizer never tested the vaccines for reducing transmission. Now that you’re here, there are a few other things you should know.
Firstly, it’s true. Pfizer didn’t test the vaccines for reducing transmission, and the regulators knew this. If this was your understanding of the vaccine, it’s because official public messaging, even from the World Health Organization, conflated vaccination with reducing transmission. It would reduce transmission they suggested, “if we all get involved.” No such tests had been done, but I’m sorry to tell you it’s much worse than that…
Pfizer did test the vaccine’s ability to reduce rates of “Covid-19”. To be specific, “Covid-19” means testing positive and being symptomatic. The data looked great by the way, Pfizer had a wonderful graph to show the effect. The blue line is infections in the unvaccinated, and the red line is infections in the vaccinated.
But there is a fatal problem with this data, and lots of policy was based on it. That data you can see up there, the main argument for the vaccine passports, the vaccine mandates and all the terrifying media campaigns comes from a fraudulent study.
What does that mean exactly? The investigators were forging documents, forging signatures, changing diagnoses, and unblinding the patients. A whistleblower saw it all, took pictures, took notes, and took the story to the British Medical Journal. They published it. Read that all again. The investigators on that absolutely critical Pfizer trial were forging documents. (See link for article)
_________________
**Comment**
Anyone reading the information on this website has known this information a long, long time ago.
The author clearly points out that the evidence (graph) Pfizer is using is worthless until we get to the bottom of the fraud case, which is ongoing and which the BBC and mainstream media didn’t report on at all proving that Big Media is complicit in all of this.
He also points out that when credible people attempted to inform the public they were silenced. Go to the top link to hear the author interview the whistleblower.
While the debate over what the “vaccine” was tested for is important, even more important is the massive ongoing legal case over the claims of fraud.
The author states it only gets “weirder” as the allegedly fraudulent trial continues……
Knowledge About Lack of Protection Against Transmission is Old, Not New
The admission by a Pfizer exec has set social media ablaze with shock. That’s what you get when you suppress inconvenient truths. Now the flawed policies must be reversed or rescinded.
Please read this all the way through. It’s infuriating, I know. BUT – this is why I’m asking you to (1) upgrade to Paid and (2) share EVERY ARTICLE in real time.
Popular Rationalism applies reason and logic to real-world events. In this dystopian time of messaging, you’ll be a year ahead on the misinformation. This proves it.
Just when public trust in Public Health could not get lower, it fell of the crapper and into the fire.
comes the Orwellian tale of “we never did the studies because we had to move at the speed of science”. Seriously, you can’t make this up…
When asked by Rob Roos, a member of the European Parliament, “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market? Did we know about stopping immunization before it entered the market?”
Pfizer’s Janine Small, president of international developed markets, said in response: “No … You know, we had to … really move at the speed of science to know what is taking place in the market.”
Epoch Times wrote:
“A Pfizer executive said Monday that neither she nor other Pfizer officials knew whether its COVID-19 vaccine would stop transmission before entering the market last year…
“…Roos, of the Netherlands, argued in a Twitter video Monday that following Small’s comments to him, millions of people around the world were duped by pharmaceutical companies and governments.
‘Millions of people worldwide felt forced to get vaccinated because of the myth that ‘you do it for others,’‘ Roos said. ‘Now, this turned out to be a cheap lie’ and ‘should be exposed,’ he added.”
Yikes.
But wait, there’s more.
“The Food and Drug Administration wrote in late 2020 that there was no data available to determine whether the vaccine would prevent transmission and for how long it would protect against transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.”
‘At this time, data are not available to make a determination about how long the vaccine will provide protection, nor is there evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person,’ the agency specifically noted.
Hold the phone there, because my ally from the UK, John Stone, and the internet, remembers things a bit differently (the links provided are from John, the descriptions and quotes are pulled by me):
By Sept, 2020, the goalposts had already been moved to hospitalization, per the NY Times, which nudged:
“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications? The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”
The WashPo got serious about this, warning that actually studying transmission rates (which track rates of mild or asymptomatic disease) should not be done:
“A close reading suggests the clinical trials have been designed to ensure the greatest possible success for these candidates — and that could overstate their effectiveness. In both the Moderna and Pfizer trials, for example, the primary objective is to prevent any occurrence of covid-19, not necessarily a severe case. Preventing serious illness is a secondary objective.”
Even vaccine risk, death and injury denialist Peter Hotez was telling Medpage today in early November:
“Even as the first vaccines become more widely available they may be only partially protective to reduce severity of illness and won’t stop transmission anyway so we won’t need to pay people for that purpose,” he told MedPage Today. “So I don’t foresee a reason to pay anyone to get vaccinated against COVID-19.”
Similarly, vaccine injury denialist Fiona Godlee warned, explicitly in BMJ:
“So instead we are heading for vaccines that reduce severity of illness rather than protect against infection, provide only short lived immunity, and will at best have been trialled by the manufacturer against placebo. As well as damaging public confidence and wasting global resources by distributing a poorly effective vaccine, this could change what we understand a vaccine to be. Instead of long term, effective disease prevention it could become a suboptimal chronic treatment. This would be good for business but bad for global public health.”
“Meanwhile, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, around the same time, said his firm was ‘not certain’ if those who receive its mRNA vaccine will be able to transmit COVID-19 to other people.
‘I think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now,’ Bourla told NBC News in December 2020 in response to a question about transmissibility.
Former White House medical adviser Dr. Deborah Birx in June revealed that there was evidence in December 2020 that individuals who received COVID-19 vaccines, including Pfizer’s, could still transmit the virus.
“We knew early on in January of 2021, in late December of 2020, that reinfection was occurring after natural infection,” Birx, the White House COVID-19 response coordinator during the Trump administration, told members of Congress this year.
Enter the Faucists (My Subheading, Not ET’s)
A number of officials in the United States and around the world had claimed COVID-19 vaccines could prevent transmission. Among them, President Joe Biden in July 2021 remarked that “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
President Joe Biden speaks, flanked by White House Chief Medical Adviser on COVID-19 Dr. Anthony Fauci, during a visit to the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., on Feb. 11, 2021. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
“Chief Biden administration medical adviser Anthony Fauci in May 2021 said in a CBS interview that vaccinated people are ‘dead ends’ for COVID-19, suggesting they cannot transmit the virus. ‘When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community,’ Fauci said.
Epoch times goes on to report that by July Fauci, Walensky and the other Faucists were admitting no protection against transmission.
Remember that time when we swore in a President with no crowd, waiting for a vaccine that didn’t work, while Pierre Kory and Peter McCullough and others were yelling from the rooftops that early treatments work?
Dystopian movie? No. Dystopian USA, January, 2021.
Policies Set in Place Based on Misinformation from Fauci Must Be Reversed
California has criminalized misinformation from doctors. Fine. Turn in the doctors that tell you lies about COVID-19 vaccines. Ask them who is at greater risk of infection, and if they lie, turn them in.
We need to reverse any and all policies that have led to forced vaccination. The Military. Healthcare workers. Colleges. Front-liners. And everyone who lost their jobs due to refusal to obey should be given their jobs back with back pay. And compensation for any financial distress caused by their job loss.
You saw it all happening, chronicled right here in real time on Popular Rationalism.
Remember, Fauci was peddling a second lock-down in November in a last-ditch effort to win the argument on Federal vaccine mandates, after pitching Omicron as “dangerous”.
A wonderfully, unbiased article just came out that is definitely worth reading. In it, the author states that spreading “misinformation” is a deliberate, willful act and that historically brilliant academics have defended their ideas, right or wrong, to the end. This is not a malicious act. They truly believe their views. This is not misinformation. The author uses the Bradford-Hill criterion to examine the “no virus theory” and ultimately concludes the theory has too many holes to be scientifically viable; however, he admits it is up to the “no virus” theorists to enlist the researchers and scientists to prove their theory.
The understanding of viral isolation is admittedly far above my pay grade. My first introduction to the topic was through the book “Virus Mania: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics Making Billion-Dollar Profits At Our Expense” by Torsten Engelbrecht and Dr. Claus Kohnlein. Then I became acquainted with and read the works of David Crowe, RIP. The information is eye-opening to say the least and would explain many things if proven. While the jury’s still out for me, many of the things presented – particularly the corruption of Big Pharma, governments, mainstream media, and the blatant use of the faulty PCR for diagnosis (as stated by none other than the PCR inventor, Kary Mullis), are true.
But viral isolation remains a controversial topic and one that needs to be addressed and proven. I admire and respect the people on both sides of the argument, so it really does require public debate with unemotional scientific facts, which the following three articles present.
The witch hunts are very, very real and are not new.
It’s an ugly, never-ending circle that is completely behind patient suffering and misery, purposefully thereto protect insurance companies from having to pay for a lengthy, chronic illness. These corrupt leaders also don’t want to admit Lyme/MSIDS is persistent due to “vaccine” development which is the cash cow in the Pharmaceutical industry which pays out big dividends to investors, of which are members of Congress, other politicians, and those in academic research institutions who all stand to gain from it.
If they lied about Lyme/MSIDS, they most probably have lied about many diseases including COVID.
All that said, the following three articles are in opposition to the tenets of the no virus theory and are important reading.
The “Statement on Virus Isolation” by Kaufman, Cowan, and Morell, who claim that SARS-CoV-2 “does not exist”, is contradicted by their own cited sources.
In their “Statement on Virus Isolation“, propagators of the claim that SARS-CoV-2 “does not exist” Andrew Kaufman, Tom Cowan, and Sally Fallon Morell cite three sources to support their argument. In this video (also on Rumble), I demonstrate their lack of credibility by showing how their claims are contradicted by their own cited sources.
Virus denialists have a large following. Tom Cowan, in particular, believes that we need to be able to use our own senses to know something exists. This is a simplifying but empirically impoverished viewpoint on what we can know via Science.
Tom took to Bitchute in a video to respond to eight points that I posted on the matter.
He did not address eight points. Here, without adding to disunity, I rebut (again, and likely for the last time), the claims by providing scientific evidence.
An Aside
As an aside, understand that I am reluctantly taking my time to write this article, because I know that those promulgating virus denialism will not pay heed to any scientific evidence I provide that demonstrates the falseness of their claims.
When I have debated virus deniers in the past and provided references to studies that directly rebut their false claims, they have ignored the scientific evidence I provided and continued to make the same statements – the very next day. I know this because after I debated a virus denier in a recorded debate, I happened to also be in a zoom meeting the next day with one of the participants in the event. They acted as if the studies I sent to them did not exist and simply repeated the same faulty claims that were made by my opponent the day before.
In his Bitchute, it is interesting that Tom skipped over my Point #1: that Koch himself failed, using his own criteria, to identify now-known pathogens. This is a rather important point, and Tom’s failure to address it speaks volumes.
In my response, I will simply provide studies that show that the specific claims about SARS-CoV-2 virus by virus deniers like Cowan are factually incorrect. The studies I show are representative of a much, much larger body of published science that shows the basic claims being made are false.
I will not speculate on the motivation of those who would care to continue to ignore studies. They themselves can address that obvious question.
Koch’s Postulates
Koch developed rules to follow by which one can determine if a pathogen is responsible for a disease. The reader should be aware these were published in 1884; Koch updated them to relax the first postulate when he discovered asymptomatic transmission. Also, Koch’s postulates fail to apply to typhoid fever, diphtheria, leprosy, relapsing fever, and Asiatic cholera specifically because it is difficult to create ‘the disease anew’ in animals upon infection (Ref).
Koch’s postulates were addressed head-on for the SARS virus in 2003. See
(1) The microorganism must be found in diseased but not healthy individuals;
We know that asymptomatic COVID-19 infection can occur. Koch himself had to modify his postulates after he discovered asymptomatic infections could occur.
(2) The microorganism must be cultured from the diseased individual;
SARS-CoV-2 has, in fact, been cultured. It’s a matter of routine:
“In the present work, we tested 4 strains of SARS-CoV-2 locally isolated on a panel of 34 cell lines present in our laboratory and commonly used for the isolation of human pathogenic microorganism. After inoculation, cells were observed for cytopathic effects and quantitative real-time polymerase reaction was used to measure the virus replication on the cells. We were able to obtain growth on 7 cell lines, 6 simian, and the human Caco-2. The cytopathogenic effects are variable, ranging from lysis of the cell monolayer in 48–72 h to no cytopathic effect in spite of intense multiplication, as in Caco-2 cells. Interestingly, effect and multiplication varied widely according to the strain tested.”
“Viral RNA and cultivable virus were recovered from the cultured cells after qRT-PCR and plaque assays. Of 20 patients, 10 (50%) had a solid organ transplant and 5 (25%) had a hematologic malignancy. For most patients, RT-PCR Ct values increased over time. There were 2 patients with positive viral cell cultures; one patient had chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with venetoclax and obinutuzumab who had a low viral titer of 27 PFU/mL.”
Even the important study showing that use of too high RT-PCR cycle thresholds led to false positives used the ability to create a culture and infectiousness from clinical samples
Madison Area Lyme Support Group 
