+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 33 of 33

Thread: Medical Tyranny

  1. Link to Post #21
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    More about the Anti-WHO Press Conference
    JAMES ROGUSKI
    MAY 17, 2023
    https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/...ess-conference

    Sovereignty Coalition Press Conference
    "A number of members of Congress held a brief press conference today in Washington DC in support of #ExitTheWHO and to raise awareness about the actions of the World Health Organization.

    Click here to exit the WHO (not just for those in the US: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/exit-the-who


    On January 9, 2023, Congressman Andy Biggs from the 5th District in Arizona submitted House Resolution 79 (The WHO Withdrawal Act).
    When I began this effort, there were only 7 co-sponsors.

    CURRENT STATUS: Representative Biggs has been joined by 34 co-sponsors, so we still need 218-35 = 183 more co-sponsors.
    The proposed legislation is very simple.
    H.R. 79 would stop all United States funding of the World Health Organization and it would also repeal the Act of June 14, 1948 that got the United States into the WHO and would begin the one year process to enable the United States to #ExitTheWHO.
    CLICK HERE TO READ H.R. 79: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-...2HR79%22%5D%7D





    MUCH MUCH MORE HERE: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/exit-the-who
    and HERE: https://standforhealthfreedom.com/


    Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v2f9x3a/?pub=ijro7
    Last edited by onawah; 18th May 2023 at 17:43.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th September 2023), Ewan (18th May 2023), Harmony (22nd May 2023), Pam (21st May 2023), Tintin (22nd May 2023)

  3. Link to Post #22
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    W.H.O. Do You Think You Are?
    JAMES ROGUSKI
    MAY 20, 2023
    https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/...m_medium=email

    Admin Edit 2023-05-22 @13:18GMT: video now embedded here - Tintin Q



    "I was honored to participate in an exposé of the World Health Organization along with Catherine Austin Fitts, Wolfgang Wodard, David Bell, Sylvia Behrendt, Philipp Kruse and Meryl Nass.
    Please watch the video below…
    (Skip the first 8 minutes and 30 seconds)
    https://boxcast.tv/view-embed/who-do...gthppxojcudk6w









    The old system is crumbling, and we must build its replacement quickly.

    If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help build a holistic alternative to the WHO, then feel free to contact me directly anytime.

    JamesRoguski.com

    JamesRoguski.substack.com/about

    JamesRoguski.substack.com/archive

    310-619-3055

    All content is free to all readers.

    All support is deeply appreciated."

    (Roguski also has written many other exposing articles about the WHO here: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/...m_medium=email )
    Last edited by onawah; 22nd May 2023 at 21:47.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th September 2023), Ewan (21st May 2023), Harmony (22nd May 2023), Pam (21st May 2023), Tintin (22nd May 2023)

  5. Link to Post #23
    Avalon Member Delight's Avatar
    Join Date
    12th January 2012
    Posts
    6,094
    Thanks
    8,707
    Thanked 39,405 times in 5,730 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    There are two sides to a reign of tyrrany. There is the "tyrant" (person but more likely a "group") and then there is the "population". If the population cooperates with tyrany, it is so much easier to reign. Carrots and sticks and poisoning the group (mentally, emotionally, physically)so they are immobilized looks like a comprehensive plan.

    The worst forms of torture have been deliberately committed by those we should trust. It is SO TERRIBLE that we are stunned INTO SUBMISSION.

    Venom, COVID, and Neanderthal Genes: Conversation with Dr. Tau Braun
    A delightful conversation and a non-sensationalist take.
    TESSA LENA
    APR 30, 2023


    Dr. Tau Braun - The Spike Protein Functions as a Neurological TRANQUILIZER


    Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v2lt04w/?pub=mpxgj

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Delight For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th September 2023), Harmony (22nd May 2023), onawah (22nd May 2023)

  7. Link to Post #24
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    Justice For Medicine/Hearings in Ontario
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Justice For Medicine/6/13/23
    JAMES ROGUSKI
    JUN 12, 2023
    https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/...m_medium=email

    "Please send an email to tribunal@opsdt.ca (College of Physicians) to get links to view the hearings that begin on Tuesday June 13, 2023.
    IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED:
    DrTrozzi.org

    PLEASE TAKE ACTION NOW TO ATTEND THE HEARINGS VIRTUALLY
    College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario v. Trozzi.
    The 7-day hearing begins on Tuesday, June 13 at 9:00 am EDT
    ON Monday July 17, 2023 --Final Legal Arguments

    Send an email to tribunal@opsdt.ca to request links to view the hearings online.
    You will need to request a separate link each day of the hearings.
    They will make it very tedious with hopes that no one will attend the virtual meetings.

    'Dear College of Physicians,
    Please send me whatever link(s) are needed to enable me to view the hearings regarding the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario v. Trozzi.'

    Dr. Mark Trozzi will be challenging the College's flagrant disregard of the need to establish reasonable and probable grounds before initiating an investigation and, most importantly, he will be defending the right to speak freely in all matters of public concern, as guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada.'

    Dr. Trozzi


    In the course of his defence, he will make Canadian legal history by advancing a new basis for the defence of freedom of expression under the Charter.

    Dr. Mark Trozzi, a former Ontario emergency department doctor and teacher has been instrumental in raising the awareness of Canadians and people worldwide by speaking truth to power.

    Dr. Mark Trozzi has been a beacon of hope in crazy times. Being one of the earliest doctors to speak out on COVID, he pre-emptively went on leave from his teaching and hospital job so that they could not pressure him into silence. He wanted to be able to research first-hand one of the biggest coverups in our history.

    Even though he wasn't practicing, the College of Physicians and Surgeons still came after him, and he is now forced to defend himself.

    The College finally came for his licence, when only a few months ago, he stepped in to see patients at the practice of Dr. Crystal Luchkiw, another brave physician who had her licence pulled for speaking her mind about COVID-19. As Dr. Luchkiw's patients were without a doctor, Dr. Trozzi and Dr. Chris Shoemaker volunteered to see her patients to keep the practice open.

    The day they started, and for no reason other than perhaps spite, the College pulled Dr. Trozzi's licence the very same day. He wasn't lecturing on COVID-19, he wasn't giving vaccine exemptions, and he wasn't spreading “misinformation” (i.e. the truth) on social media. He was simply doing what doctors do best: treating patients who desperately needed a doctor. For this they pulled his licence - something they could have done months before for his supposed "COVID Crimes" but instead they chose the very day he was helping Dr. Luchkiw's vulnerable patients.

    Since Dr. Luchkiw's practice has shut down, several of her patients have died, at least one by suicide.

    Dr. Trozzi plans to keep fighting these baseless charges all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada if necessary.

    Most recently, in no small part through his tireless efforts, Canadians can now access medical care through The Wellness Company in Canada.

    As Dr. Mark Trozzi has functioned internationally on everyone's behalf -- let's ALL of us send him our grateful thanks and make his hearing/persecution an international affair!

    In other words, let us show the tribunal that Dr. Trozzi is too big for them to chew on without serious consequences.
    The hearings begin at 9am Eastern (6am Pacific) on Tuesday morning, June 13, 2023.
    There will be some fireworks!

    PLEASE ATTEND THE HEARINGS
    Send an email to tribunal@opsdt.ca to request links to view the hearings.

    ADDITIONAL CASES:
    Much is at stake for these doctors and their patients, and indeed, all Canadians and everyone on Earth.
    The doctors below are also fighting for the fundamental rights that define a free and democratic society:
    The right to make sound medical choices without state interference based on the principle informed consent;

    The right to freedom of expression in all matters, and particularly in those relating to medicine and public health;

    The right to be free from state investigations and prosecutions that are not founded on reasonable and probable grounds ("probable cause");

    Dr. Crystal Luchkiw



    Dr. Crystal Luchkiw is a family and palliative care physician from Barrie, Ontario. Prior to the pandemic, she was a highly respected family physician with a reputation for providing compassionate care based on a commitment to excellence and the principles of informed consent and “do no harm.” She held a teaching appointment in palliative care at the Royal Victoria Regional Hospital and much of her practice was devoted to caring for the elderly.

    During the pandemic response, she witnessed an extreme deviation from the fundamental principles of ethical medical practice. This caused serious harm to her patients, particularly those suffering from mental health issues and approaching end-of-life. In response, Dr. Luchkiw increased her critical scrutiny of scientific literature and questioned whether public health measures were properly balancing the public good with patient welfare.

    In speaking out about the increasing harms to her patients and the public-at-large, she was targeted by hospital administrators and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. As a result, the College suspended her licence in March of 2022 and deprived her 1,700 patients of medical care during a physician shortage, while also cancelling their prescriptions, scheduled tests and appointments with specialists. Since her suspension, Dr. Luchkiw has pursued legal action against the College for investigating and prosecuting her without legal justification and infringing her constitutional right to freedom of expression.

    Patrick Phillips, MD


    Patrick Phillips, MD, is an emergency and family physician from Englehart, Ontario. Through the course of the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdowns, his patients suffered harms due to draconian public health measures.

    After witnessing everything from missed cancer screenings resulting in terminal cancer diagnoses to a surge in childhood suicidal ideation and suicide attempts, Dr. Phillips could not stand by silently. In spite of an edict from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, ordering doctors to remain silent on vaccine adverse events and the harms of lockdowns, he openly discussed the suffering he was witnessing first-hand; he also provided cutting-edge information about alternative Covid-19 treatments. As well, he frequently participated in freedom rallies, including the Truckers' Convoy in Ottawa.

    In reprisal, the College suspended his licence and has been seeking its revocation by means of a discipline hearing. Recently, Dr. Phillips entered a plea of no contest in his case, in part, so that resources can be devoted to the defence of first principles in the Luchkiw and Trozzi cases. However, in doing so, he has preserved the right to re-apply for his licence should the College Tribunal or the Ontario courts render a judgment in favour of his colleagues. Dr. Phillips remains committed to evidence-based medicine, the principles of informed consent and “do no harm,” and the right to freedom of expression guaranteed under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. You can follow him on Twitter: @DrP_MD


    JusticeForMedicine.com
    Justice for Medicine is seeking public support to defend our doctors and their patients because their fate is intimately bound to the enjoyment of the rights and liberties guaranteed to everyone under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    The Justice For Medicine website provides a meeting place where everyone can get insider updates on the latest developments in our continuing defence efforts. It will also provide cutting-edge information combating the one-sided narrative around COVID-19 favoured by Western governments and mainstream media. This includes access to the latest articles, speeches and alt-media interviews featuring the doctors and their professional allies in Canada and around the world.

    Please watch Dr. Trozzi's hearing this week - and support him financially if you are able. The multiple days of hearings will be very costly.

    Thank you so much to those who have already donated, it has meant so much.

    Michael Alexander


    You can reach Michael Alexander at info@JusticeForMedicine.com

    by James Roguski
    The old system is crumbling, and we must build its replacement quickly.

    If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help build a holistic alternative to the WHO, then feel free to contact me directly anytime.

    JamesRoguski.com

    JamesRoguski.substack.com/about

    JamesRoguski.substack.com/archive

    310-619-3055

    All content is free to all readers.

    All support is deeply appreciated.

    James Roguski’s newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th September 2023), Ewan (13th June 2023), Harmony (13th June 2023), Miller (20th September 2023), Strat (13th June 2023)

  9. Link to Post #25
    United States Avalon Member Bo Atkinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    8th January 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Language
    English
    Age
    75
    Posts
    938
    Thanks
    2,678
    Thanked 3,519 times in 831 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    This link goes to a video:

    https://live.childrenshealthdefense....tm_id=20230920

    EPISODE 252
    SEP 20, 2023

    Guilty of Saving Lives: Dr. Meryl Nass ‘Tarred + Feathered’ as Hearings Conclude + More

    Thinking, rational people have always been skeptical of unreasonable bureaucrats, and many Mainers are suspicious of cooperate medical cultism, (Maine is where all of this is occurring).

  10. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Bo Atkinson For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th September 2023), Ewan (21st September 2023), Harmony (6th October 2023), lisalu (21st September 2023), Miller (20th September 2023), onawah (20th September 2023), Reinhard (16th November 2023)

  11. Link to Post #26
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    Shocking expose from Dr. Ardis of rampant malpractice--Fauci, NIH, CDC, etc. I think he puts to rest in this video the whole argument as to whether there is a COVID virus or not, starting at 1 hour 12 minutes intoi the video.
    Though to get the whole explanation, you need to start at the beginning.
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    THE ANTIDOTE | THE EXPLOSIVE TRUTH, ORIGIN AND ANTIDOTE FOR C-19
    September 28, 2023
    https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/the...re-everywhere/

    (Hopefully there will be a transcript for this conversation, because it's well worth knowing what Ardis has to say, even if you don't have 2&1/2 hours to listen.)

    ""Watch this explosive interview with Dr Bryan Ardis and Jason Shurka exposing the truth, origin, and unexpected antidote for C19 that ravaged the world.
    Dr Bryan Ardis is a renowned doctor and researcher who has been at the forefront of uncovering the origins of C19 and finding ways to counter its effects. Despite facing resistance from major pharmaceutical companies, Dr Ardis remains steadfast in his mission to unearth the truth.
    Jason Shurka has been closely monitoring Dr Ardis’s progress over the past year and supports his efforts to disseminate this vital information to a global audience. This interview serves to bring his valuable insights to the forefront."


    Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v3jbpg5/?pub=ijro7
    Last edited by onawah; 2nd October 2023 at 22:44.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Harmony (6th October 2023), Reinhard (16th November 2023), Sue (Ayt) (8th October 2023)

  13. Link to Post #27
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    California Quietly Repeals Law to Censor Doctors
    Drbeen Medical Lectures
    633K subscribers
    10/5/23

    (Hyperlinks not embedded here)
    "According to the legal firm HLLI: Governor Newsom and the California State legislature have conceded defeat and repealed AB 2098, a California state law that restricted doctors’ First Amendment free speech rights by threatening disciplinary action against their license for discussing with patients anything about COVID-19 that the State views as “disinformation” or “misinformation.” "

    URL list from Thursday, Oct. 5 2023 15:25 PM

    My previous talks about this law:
    https://www.youtube.com/live/KF4_EyFQ...
    https://www.youtube.com/live/CZ03vz7p...


    Bill Text - AB-2098 Physicians and surgeons: unprofessional conduct.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...

    (1) Azadeh Khatibi, MD, MS, MPH on X: "And with a stroke of a pen, AB2098, California's COVID medical censorship law, has been quietly repealed by the very same people who had ridiculously wanted it in place. For a year-and-a-half now, I’ve spoken out against this law. Ultimately, I and others sued @GavinNewsom and… https://t.co/iAL5UQtReo" / X
    https://twitter.com/azadehkhatibi/sta...

    HLLI Claims Victory with Repeal of California COVID-19 “Disinformation” Statute – Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute
    https://hlli.org/hlli-claims-victory-...

    California COVID-19 misinformation law repealed | Credentialing Resource Center
    https://credentialingresourcecenter.c...

    California Repeals COVID Misinformation Law, Bowing to Legal Pressure - Liberty Justice Center
    https://libertyjusticecenter.org/news...

    California's COVID-19 misinformation law is dead
    https://www.beckershospitalreview.com...

    California Misinfo Law Is Dead | MedPage Today
    https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-...

    California law aiming to curb COVID misinformation blocked by judge | Reuters
    https://www.reuters.com/business/heal...

    Doctors who deliver COVID falsehoods no longer committing ‘misconduct’
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/health/ar...

    Newsom repeals CA law that ‘censored’ doctors giving COVID-19 care | Fox News
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/newsom-rep...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUoqeD9n8uI
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Ewan (6th October 2023), Harmony (6th October 2023), Reinhard (16th November 2023)

  15. Link to Post #28
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    How Big Pharma Bought the Federal Government
    Analysis by A Midwestern Doctor
    October 07, 2023
    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...overnment.aspx

    (Hyperlinks in the article not embedded here.)

    https://media.mercola.com/ImageServe...rnment-pdf.pdf

    "STORY AT-A-GLANCE
    The gross malfeasance observed throughout COVID-19 has opened many people’s eyes to the immense corruption within our government
    This corruption has been gradually growing over decades, and at this point numerous well-established mechanisms exist for the pharmaceutical industry to buy out federal employees, guideline committees, and regulatory agencies
    Much of that corruption has been directly orchestrated by Anthony Fauci, a man who is directly responsible for making the American government no longer serve its people — while being paid handsomely for doing so
    Addressing the root causes of this corruption is vital for the future of our nation and necessary to prevent something even worse than what we witnessed throughout COVID-19 from being enacted in the future

    For a society to function, it requires a collective trust in the society’s institutions. One of the most challenging things for many to come to terms with throughout COVID-19 has been how each institution we trusted to protect us instead pushed a variety of unjustifiable policies and then refused to stop pushing them even as public protest broke out against the harm those policies were creating. I would argue what we saw throughout the pandemic was ultimately a consequence of two things:

    Medicine is one of the United State’s most lucrative industries (the amount we spend on it has steadily increased each year).
    The practice of medicine is controlled by regulatory bodies who grant monopolies to any party which can complete the arduous tasks needed to earn their seal of approval.
    Because of this, an immense incentive exists to buy out the regulators, so unscrupulously spending large amounts of money to earn a coveted spot in the medical marketplace has become a routine business practice for the pharmaceutical industry.

    In turn, as time has moved forward, and the medical industry has continued to grow (e.g., in 2021, 4.3 trillion dollars went to healthcare, amounting to 18.3% of all spending in the USA), the corruption that sustains it has proliferated throughout our institutions.

    Because of the wanton disregard for the science we saw throughout COVID-19, much of the public now believes our institutions are throughly corrupt. However, what is much less understood is the anatomy of that corruption and how deeply it has entwined itself within the Federal government.

    Tightening the Thumbscrews
    A common pattern I repeatedly witness is a new institution being created by strongly investing in creating the idealized version of it, then once that ideal version has earned the public’s trust and everyone becomes invested in its new way of doing things (to the point they can’t return to how things were before), the screws are gradually tightened on the institution. Once this happens, those who work within the institution often become willing to compromise on their values and ethics.

    For example, a college education was originally considered a specialized path for those genuinely interested in scholarly pursuits. However, after it became a way for individuals to dodge being drafted into the Vietnam War, many more began pursuing it, which made the Federal Government’s willingness to provide unconditional loans to anyone wishing to pursue a college education give birth to an enormous industry which rapidly inflated the costs of a college tuition.

    This, in turn, increasingly incentivized colleges to prioritize growth and to retain their failing students so those students would continue paying tuition.

    In parallel to this, the job of a college professor radically changed; previously they were in short supply now a glut of them exists in the marketplace, especially since the growth-focused mentality of higher education has eliminated the previous stipulation that professors needed to be selected on the basis of their academic merit.

    Because of this, there are many professors (often with PhD’s) who have a low enough salary they need food stamps to make their ends meet and hence cannot do anything which challenges their employers.

    For example, I’ve talked to numerous professors who have stated that they have been forced by their administration to disregard cheating from their students (so they would continue to pay tuition) and a cottage industry now exists for professors to make money on the side by writing papers (e.g., a thesis) for students seeking a degree.

    Note: One of the best compilations I saw of the increasing corruption within the educational sector came from a blog by an anonymous college professor. A few years ago he passed away from a grossly mismanaged testicular cancer, so the final posts on it focus on medicine rather than education.

    As you might imagine, this issue has also seeped into the medical field as medical schools make a lot of money. In turn, as the years have gone by, colleagues have shared increasingly concerning instances of cheating being swept under the rug or them being pressured by the administration to find ways to pass students who should have otherwise failed.

    Likewise, since the position of a professor (and often a graduate student) is so dependent on the papers they publish, they are incentivized to fabricate data so their paper can be published and many studies have shown this fraud has become a widespread issue within the scientific literature.

    One of the most overt examples we saw of this came from the recent discovery that immediately after the leak occurred at the Wuhan lab (which Fauci had funded), he panicked and then contacted a group of respected virologists to request they produce a paper to prove COVID-19 could not have come from a lab. The virologists, in turn, did just that, and Fauci repeatedly used their paper to debunk the lab leak hypothesis.

    Shortly after, the lead author had a 9.8 million dollar research grant from the NIH approved (which Fauci held the final say on) — which that author lied to Congress about, and later leaked chat messages emerged showing the paper’s authors also lied to the world as they themselves believed the virus had come from a lab.

    Note: This paper also formed the basis for Big Tech aggressively censoring anyone who suggested a lab leak had occurred. Had the lab leak hypothesis have been allowed to enter the public discourse, Fauci likely would not have been allowed to direct the response to the pandemic he himself was responsible for creating (especially given that in response to public outcry over previous leaks of dangerous pathogens, Obama had effectively banned Fauci’s research).

    Most recently, it was revealed Fauci also covertly met with the CIA when they were deliberating if SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab. The CIA in turn publicly announced the lab leak could not be proven, (which amongst other things required bribing the team responsible for the CIA’s assessment).

    Another noteworthy example occurred after the vaccines had hit the market and many recipients began developing complex neurological illnesses from them. Some of those individuals (e.g., the clinical trial participants) contacted the NIH for help and were enrolled in a study to evaluate and treat their concerning disorders.

    According to one participant (Brianne Dressen), the NIH was initially very interested in helping them (and learned from the FDA that it was aware of other clinical trial participants who had been injured), but once it became clear neurological injuries were a frequent complication of the vaccine, the NIH appears to have decided its best move was to try and bury everything and hence ghost the people it was evaluating for the neurological illnesses.

    Thus the NIH publicly denied there was any evidence neurological vaccine injuries were occurring and repeatedly pushed back the date they’d promised Dressen and others to publish the study evaluating them. Had that study been published on time, it would have greatly helped many of the patients suffering neurological injuries that “couldn’t exist” because there was no peer-reviewed literature substantiating those injuries or more importantly guidelines on how to treat them.

    In short, I’d argue that the debasement of our educational system has rippled out into the entire society as we depend on its graduates to turn the gears of everything (e.g., by appropriately conducting scientific research), and if we have incompetent or dishonest personnel occupy these positions, the institutions they staff decay as well.

    Note: This issue was significantly worsened by Obama’s decision to prioritize academic qualifications rather than real world experience in the federal hiring process. Similarly, most of his senior officials had a degree from an Ivy League college.

    Revenue Shortfalls
    One of the primary ways the thumbscrews have been tightened throughout the society has been by gradually impoverishing everyone except the working class (most recently, from 2020 to 2021, billionaires went from owning slightly over 2% of the global household wealth to 3.5% of it.). Because of this, almost every institution we depend upon is underfunded and thus willing to consider unethical sources of funding.

    For instance, industry often “donates” large amounts of money to schools in return for favorable research being pursued there, and then may threaten to withhold those donations unless an unrelated professor within the college stops performing research that is critical of the industry.

    Within the federal government, this impoverishment comes through budgets being slashed and agencies inevitably looking to the private sector for funding. In turn, something similar to what is observed in the educational sector happens, although the scale of it is often far worse.

    For example, in 1983, Congress authorized the CDC to accept gifts “made unconditionally…for the benefit of the [Public Health] Service or for the carrying out of any of its functions.” Then in 1992, Congress established The National Foundation for the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention so that CDC could obtain additional funding for its work, or put differently, created a third party for passing tainted money to the CDC.

    The CDC Foundation has been accused of egregious conduct since its inception and has received nearly 1 billion dollars from corporate “donors.” The potential for the foundation enabling corruption in turn has been criticized by many, including by a scathing editorial in one of the world’s top medical journals. Many examples of its corruption are documented within this 2019 letter to the CDC. They include:

    •Being paid by a pesticide industry firm to conduct a study to prove the safety of two pesticides.

    •During the years 2010-15, Coca-Cola contributed more than 1 million dollars to the CDC Foundation. In return, the CDC offered numerous services including collaborative meetings and advice from a top CDC staffer on how to lobby the World Health Organization to curtail the WHO’s initiative to reduce global consumption of added sugars — which is really something given that the CDC has been tasked with fighting obesity.

    •Taking money from Roche to push Tamiflu (which the CDC continues to do to this day), an ineffective and harmful flu treatment which was approved off of data that was kept secret from the public.

    Note: As of 2019, the CDC also owned 57 vaccine patents and recently spent $4.9 of its $12.0 billion-dollar annual budget buying and distributing vaccines. This may help to explain why the CDC always recommends every vaccine regardless of the evidence arguing against of doing so or how much opposition they receive from the public (and sometimes even their advisors).

    Members of Congress have even formally complained about the payments to the CDC foundation (as have anonymous whistleblowers within the CDC). In short, the conflicts of interest with the CDC foundation are immense and help to explain why the CDC always pushes corrupt and harmful policies (e.g., many of the profiteers who benefitted immensely from the COVID-19 vaccination campaign had previously given the CDC millions).

    Note: Many other agencies within the federal government, including the CIA and the NIH, have their own foundations that were also created by Congress to allow them to access corporate bribes donations that are not subject to legal oversight such as freedom of information act requests).

    Not surprisingly, many of the directors of these foundations, like their peers in government, often follow the revolving door and end up in high-paying executive roles at major pharmaceutical companies after leaving the foundations.

    The pernicious influence of industry cash can also be seen at the FDA. On October 29, 1992, in response to public concerns that no AIDS treatments were getting to market (which was a result of Fauci deliberately blocking all of them to clear the way for the deadly and ineffective AZT), Congress and then George Bush Sr. signed into law the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, which authorized the FDA to take money from the drug makers it approved drugs for.

    As a result of this act, drug approval times were shortened (going from 29 months in 1987 to 10 months in 2018), and the percentage of drugs that were approved the first time an approval was requested dramatically increased. Conversely, prior to the act, 21% of medications were removed from the market or had new black box warnings added to them.

    After the act, this figure increased to 27% as a result of factors such as senior FDA officials overturning its scientists’ recommendations, and the evidence required for a medication approval being lowered.

    As a result of these changes, user fees now comprise a significant portion of the FDA’s budget (e.g., 46% in 2022, and approximately of the 65% of that allotted for regulating drugs used in humans) — which not surprisingly has had an increasingly corrupting influence on the FDA’s drug approval process.

    One of the best illustrations of this can be seen with the current FDA commissioner Robert Califf, who in 2009, was considered to be too close to the industry to nominate to the position, yet in 2021 was appointed to it, and ever since gaining control of the FDA has advanced the interests of his industry.

    For example shortly after the backdoor approval of a controversial Alzheimer’s drug, Califf was a keynote speaker at the annual pharmaceutical industry conference which emphasized the incredible investment opportunities offered by the new Alzheimer’s and obesity drugs (which the agency was also pushing through).

    Furthermore in addition to being overtly compensated by the industry for supporting its interests (e.g., Califf had taken a lot of money from Big Pharma), a revolving door also exists to pay them off after the fact. Consider for instance that the second official appointed by Trump to head the FDA, Scott Gottleib is now on Pfizer’s board.

    Likewise, Stephan Hahn the commissioner who was in charge of the FDA for the entirety of Operation Warp Speed (and as Peter Navarro showed, against the president’s orders, actively sabotaged affordable and effective treatments for COVID-19) Hahn is now an executive for the venture capital firm that launched Moderna (and thus owns a significant portion of it).

    Note: This issue exists beyond the healthcare sector — for instance Lloyd Austin was first a four-star general under Obama, then left to become a board member for Raytheon, and then left that position to become Biden’s Secretary of Defense. Since becoming in charge of our military, one of the worst wars in modern history has broken out, which coincidently required a massive amount of weaponry to be purchased from defense contractors like Raytheon.

    All of this has effectively created a “pay-to-play” situation, where it’s almost impossible to get a drug approved unless you have a lot of money and as a result, therapies that put people before profits have a very difficult time getting through.

    This was best shown throughout COVID-19 where numerous teams were unable to receive an EUA (or sometimes even permission to conduct American trials) for safe therapies that had strong evidence they were effective in treating COVID-19, while awful but highly lucrative therapies (e.g., Remdesivir, Paxlovid and Molnupiravir) sailed through the approval process.

    Given that the Prescription Drug User Fee Act was originally created during the AIDS crisis to help expedite emergency therapies being approved to treat novel diseases, its noteworthy the exact opposite ultimately happened.

    Note: I was heavily involved with one team which attempted to secure an EUA, and it was depressing how high a standard we were held to compared to Pfizer.

    Likewise, a big part of why Steve Kirsch originally got involved with the vaccine issue was because he provided a wealth of evidence and funded the original clinical trial that demonstrated an already FDA approved drug was a highly effective treatment for COVID-19 but was stonewalled in receiving an EUA from the FDA (which Kirsch was told from an insider also sabotaged Fluvoxamine making it into the NIH’s COVID treatment guidelines).

    Guideline Committees
    One of the classic tactics propagandists and marketers use to manipulate the public is to have an “independent” party (especially a trustable one) endorse the sponsor’s position. Because of this, you frequently find that a variety of nice sounding third parties (e.g., many of those which advocate for helping patients with specific medical conditions) are taking money from corporate sponsors and ultimately advance positions that to serve their sponsor’s interests.

    A common way this technique is utilized is by delegating important policy decisions to impartial committees of qualified experts. That way, the conclusions they come to are perceived to be objective truth, rather than the work of a corrupt bureaucrat — even though in reality the corrupt bureaucrat calls the shots by deciding who ends up on the committee.

    For example, in COVID-19, much of the death that happened was the result of no effective treatments existing for COVID-19, and instead only dangerous ones like remdesivir being permitted — which seems odd given that the evidence for remdesivir was appalling, whereas the evidence for many of the other treatments was phenomenal.

    Let’s in turn consider the evidence and cost of each approved treatment for COVID-19 (the EUA list can be found here, the NIH treatment guidelines here).


    Note: A few newer (and expensive) currently approved treatments for COVID-19 are not included in the above list. Many of the discontinued therapies were the monoclonal antibodies (which effectively treated COVID-19). The FDA discontinued them because they no longer matched the circulating variants of COVID-19 — yet simultaneously this decision was not applied to the vaccines.

    I feel this decision was a shame since numerous people reported those monoclonals (which matched the vaccine spike protein) often were very helpful in treating vaccine injuries, but after the EUA was withdrawn, the entire supply was disposed of (minus a bit like what my colleague intercepted when this happened).

    From looking at this list, it seems clear the primary determinant of if a treatment ended up in the guidelines was if it did not treat the infection (instead only providing symptomatic management — which was often dangerous) or if it was a lucrative product someone was making money off of. In short, our regulators appeared to be focused on protecting the market rather than the American people.

    Interestingly, when the NIH committee which created the COVID-19 treatment guidelines was looked into, it was discovered that most of them had taken money from Gilead (remdesivir’s manufacturer). Furthermore, example this article discusses how Fauci chose to appoint one of his longtime associates (pictured below) to chair that committee.



    Note: According to a recent government investigation, the NIH spent approximately 162 million dollars developing remdesivir.

    Likewise, the official Fauci appointed to chair the committee which monitored the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines while they were being tested was a board member of Gilead and numerous members of the FDA committee which horrendously voted to approve the vaccine for children had previously worked for Pfizer.

    Note: The best argument I have seen in defense of the government hiring experts who are taking money from the company whose drug they are evaluating is that so many experts are being paid off now it’s extremely challenging to find academically qualified individuals for these committees who do not also have significant conflicts of interest.

    This is one illustration of how the pervasive corruption in academia (which increases as funds become in short supply) has rippled out into the broader society.

    Sadly, COVID was not the first time a corrupt committee’s guidelines have had massive consequences for the world. Consider this example from chapter 7 of Doctoring Data:

    “The National Cholesterol Education Programme (NCEP) has been tasked by the NIH to develop guidelines [everyone uses] for treating cholesterol levels. Excluding the chair (who was by law prohibited from having financial conflicts of interest), the other 8 members on average were on the payroll of 6 statin manufacturers.

    In 2004, NCEP reviewed 5 large statin trials and recommended: “Aggressive LDL lowering for high-risk patients [primary prevention] with lifestyle changes and statins.”

    In 2005 a Canadian division of the Cochrane Collaboration [who were not paid off] reviewed 5 large statin trials (3 were the same as NCEP’s, while the other 2 had also reached a positive conclusion for statin therapy). That assessment instead concluded: “Statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.””

    Note: Statins are widely considered to be one of the most dangerous and ineffective drugs on the market.

    When deciding on approving a new drug, the FDA seeks the advice of an outside advisory panel about half of the time (typically for more controversial or less understood drugs).

    In those cases, the FDA is more likely than not to agree with that panel — one study evaluating 416 decisions made between 1997 and 2012 found the FDA followed the advice of its panel 84% of the time, and when the FDA overruled its panel, 61% of those decisions were to have a drug rejected by the committee nonetheless be approved. Some of the more noteworthy recent over-rulings included:

    •Approving an extremely expensive Alzheimer’s drug which did not work but did frequently cause brain bleeding and swelling (which could be fatal). That drug was unanimously rejected by the advisory committee, and when the FDA still chose to approve it, three members of that panel permanently resigned from their advisory capacity.

    •A CDC advisory panel voted in favor of giving the booster six months after the second shot to those over 65, and for those with health factors that put them at risk for a severe COVID-19 infection, but against recommending it to workers who were more likely to come in contact with COVID.

    The CDC overruled that final decision and advised it for everyone (which in turn resulted in it being mandated for much of the American population since many use the CDC’s “voluntary” guidelines to craft their policies).

    Note: Around the same time the CDC overruled its committee, the FDA also overruled its advisory committee’s decision to not approve boosters for the general population which coincided with the resignation of two senior FDA officials in its vaccine division — one of whom joined a vaccine non-profit and the other who became a board member for a biotech company.

    Royalty Payments
    In 1980, the Bayh–Dole Act was passed, which gave researchers (whose research was funded by taxpayer money) and their universities the patent and royalty rights to any drug they developed. The act was intended to help facilitate discoveries making it to the marketplace (which was a valid point since things moved very slowly when the Federal Government retained control of those patents), but at the time many worried it would corrupt the national research apparatus.

    Not long after, as detailed within Chapter 7 of The Real Anthony Fauci, Fauci entered the scene and began transforming our national research apparatus into a pharmaceutical production pipeline. For example to quote a 2021 interview with RFK Jr:

    “Between 2009 and 2016, there were hundreds of drugs approved by FDA. Virtually all of them came out of [Fauci’s NIH pharmaceutical production pipeline].”

    Note: RFK Jr. recently estimated that Fauci’s agency owns 2,200 drug patents, many of which have been lucratively licensed to pharmaceutical manufacturers. Similar conflicts of interest also exist for the NIH and CDC (which may help to explain why the CDC always recommends every vaccine).

    This transformation was greatly accelerated by Fauci’s maneuvers during the AIDS crisis (creating a hysteria about the disease, blocking all effective treatments for it from coming to market and making the deadly AZT be approved and then become the standard of care) which allowed him to get his agency, the NIAID, a massive discretionary budget, a global influence over scientific research and international health policy, and a large influence over the FDA and CDC.

    In effect, Fauci gained control over the national research apparatus (which amongst other things was why he was able to destroy the careers of scientists like Peter Duesberg who challenged him as he could cut off their access to the grants every career scientist depends upon and make many reluctant to hire those who had crossed him). To create his pipeline Fauci did the following:

    He assembled a network of clinical investigators (PIs) around the country who would test these drugs, often in a highly unethical manner.
    He concealed the financial conflicts of interest from the trial participants (who likely would not have consented if they’d known they were guinea pigs for an investment).
    He worked diligently to conceal the money everyone was making from the royalties on those drugs.
    He used the money this pipeline brought in from the pharmaceutical industry to gradually buy out our regulators so they would push along his dangerous and unproven drugs.
    Note: Fauci’s wife, Christine Grady is the nation’s chief bioethicist. Throughout her tenure, she has used her position to successfully lobby for Fauci’s policies (e.g., all of horrendous ones we saw throughout COVID-19) to be deemed “ethical.”

    In short, Fauci made the Bayh–Dole Act become something far worse than its harshest critics had imagined. To quote Vera Sharav, a Holocaust survivor who has runs a non-profit directed at investigating unethical human experimentation and spent years investigating the NIAID’s conduct:

    “Beginning around 1990, clinical trials became the profit center for the medical community. The insurance industry and HMOs were squeezing doctors so that it became hard to make big money practicing medicine. The most ambitious doctors left patient care and gravitated toward clinical trials.

    Everybody involved was making money except the subjects of the human experiments. At the center of everything was NIH and NIAID. While people were not paying attention, the agency quietly became the partner of the industry.”

    RFK Jr. aptly summarizes the immense scope of Fauci’s enterprise:

    Between 2010 and 2016, every single drug that won approval from the FDA — 210 different pharmaceuticals — originated, at least in part, from research funded by the NIH.

    At the time all of this happened, the pharmaceutical industry had far less control over the media as it was only in 1997 that directly advertising pharmaceutical products became legal in the United States.

    This resulted in an ever increasing amount of advertising dollars coming from the pharmaceutical industry which in turn allowed the industry to be able to leverage media companies into never airing content critical of the industry — best illustrated by the fact in 1976, a far less dangerous (but still dangerous) experimental vaccine was recklessly deployed on America and after a significant number of people were injured, candid admissions of this were seen on mainstream news networks, something which is not allowed in today’s much more corrupt media climate.



    Note: Outside of the United States, direct pharmaceutical advertising remains illegal in most countries (New Zealand is the only other country that fully allows it — while Canada partially allows it).

    As a result, in the past, the press was much more willing to criticize Fauci’s conduct. For example, this is what the BBC’s investigator from it’s 2004 “Guinea Pig Kids” documentary shared about one of Fauci’s experiments which forced many of the participants to take the medications against their consent:

    “I found the mass grave at Gate of Heaven cemetery in Hawthorne, New York, I couldn’t believe my eyes. It was a very large pit with AstroTurf thrown over it, which you could actually lift up. Under it one could see dozens of plain wooden coffins, haphazardly stacked. There may have been 100 of them. I learned there was more than one child’s body in each.

    Around the pit was a semi-circle of several large tombstones on which upward of one thousand children’s names had been engraved. I wrote down every name. I’m still wondering who the rest of those kids were. As far as I know, nobody has ever asked Dr. Fauci that haunting question.

    I remember the teddy bears and hearts in piles around the pit and I recall the flies buzzing around. The job of recording all those names took all day. NIAID, New York, and all the hospital PIs were stonewalling us.

    We couldn’t get any accurate estimate of the number of children who died in the NIAID experiments, or who they were. I went to check the gravestone names against death certificates at the NYC Department of Health, which you could still do at that time.

    BBC wanted to match these coffins to the names of children who were known to have been at ICC. It was a very slow, byzantine project with tremendous institutional resistance, but we did turn up a few names.

    This story ran in the NY Post, believe it or not. But one after the other, every media outlet that touched this story got cold feet. Even then, the medical cartel had this power to kill this kind of story. Dr. Fauci has built his career on that attitude. Nobody even asks him a follow- up question.

    NIAID’s narrative, at that time, was that these children were among the doomed as they ‘had AIDS,’ so supposedly they were all going to die anyway. When people died, in large numbers, gruesome deaths, NIAID’s medical researchers called it ‘lessons learned.’”

    Note: Another lucrative HIV drug, Nevirapine was pushed through by Fauci and his AIDS branch DAIDS. When it was unethically tested in Africa on mothers and their children to prevent HIV transmission, thousands of adverse events occurred (including dozens of deaths), which Fauci hid from the FDA.

    Later when similar injuries occurred within the United States, Jonathan Fishbein, MD (who in 2003 was hired to oversee DAIDS’s research) tried to bring attention to these serious research violations. This resulted in Fauci firing Fishbein from DAIDS, and after a lengthy whistleblower investigation was conducted by Congress, it instituted an annual cap of 150,000 dollars on the royalties each government scientist could receive each year for the drugs they helped developed.

    In addition to the BBC, other media companies were also willing to criticize Fauci. For example:

    “According to a 2005 exposé by the Associated Press, “In all, 916 current and former NIH researchers are receiving royalty payments for drugs and other inventions they developed while working for the government.” That investigation concluded that scientists and administrators at the National Institutes of Health flagrantly disregard ethical and legal requirements of financial disclosure.

    Five years ago Donna Shalala, then Secretary of the Health and Human Services, issued federal requirements (2000) of financial disclosure requiring NIH scientists to disclose their financial interest in experimental treatments on informed consent documents reviewed by patients being recruited as test subjects.

    According to the Associated Press, NIH administrators did not even consider implementing the 5 year old federal requirement until AP filed a Freedom of Information request last week.”

    Note: Between 1997 to 2005, Fauci and his deputy H. Clifford Lane (another of the chairs of the COVID-19 treatment committee) had each received $45,072.82 in royalties for an experimental AIDS treatment they invented and spent a lot of tax payer money testing (e.g., $36 million on one experiment), often in an unethical fashion (e.g., they repeatedly failed to disclose their conflicts of interest to trial participants).

    Sadly, by the time COVID happened, the pharmaceutical production pipeline was so well established that dissenting narratives simply could not see the light of day. Because of this, Fauci continually received fawning admiration throughout the (pharmaceutically sponsored) media — the most depressing of which was probably this segment:



    More importantly, Fauci was never called out on his lies, his responsibility for creating COVID-19 or the innumerable ways he contradicted himself throughout the pandemic. Rather, he was allowed to direct the pandemic response through non-sensical proclamations that only benefitted his sponsors.

    Because of the embarrassment that was created through the 2005 AP investigation, the NIH pledged to become more transparent with royalty payments and disclose financial conflicts of interest for patients recruited into their trials. In 2021, almost twenty years later, the watchdog organization Open the Books (with the help of Judicial Watch) attempted to replicate the AP’s FOIA investigation.

    They found not surprisingly, the NIH had failed to uphold its commitment and instead had become much more secretive about its activity since 2005 (e.g., in addition to not voluntarily disclosing the pharmaceutical payments, it refused to honor legally required FOIA requests). Although much was concealed they eventually found:

    1.Over 56,000 royalty payments (from third parties) totaling over 325 million dollars were paid to 2400 NIH scientists.

    2.Many of these payments came from foreign companies (e.g., a questionable Russian company and a Chinese company that worked closely with the Wuhan lab) or vaccine companies (e.g., for the disastrous HPV vaccine).

    3.Some of the royalty payment recipients had also received massive grants from the NIH.

    4.Many of the parties paying the royalty payments had also received much larger grants from the NIH (for context the NIH gave out 30 billion dollars in grants in 2022).

    5.The most prominent figures in the NIH (who decided where those grants were directed) also received a disproportionately higher number of royalty payments. For example:

    Fauci received 37 payments between 2010-2021
    Francis Collins (the NIH director between 2009-2021) received 21 payments between 2010-2021
    Fauci’s deputy Clifford Lane received 8 payments
    Douglas Lowy who has occupied various leadership roles at the National Cancer Institute (e.g., he’s been the acting director since 2015) received 192 payments since 2009
    Unfortunately, the NIH has still refused to disclose exactly how much each of their employees has received from the royalty payments.

    Fortunately, with the help of Congress, Adam Andrzejewski was eventually able to obtain Fauci’s financial disclosures and discover how much he and his wife made during the pandemic response (which Fauci’s recently released calendar shows he was directing behind the scenes with all the key players long before COVID-19 was officially acknowledged):



    Note: Fauci is the highest paid federal employee, while is wife is one of the highest (she makes more than the vice president). He is also presently slated to receive a retirement pension of over $350,000.00 a year — which is also the largest federal pension in history.

    Sadly, this excellent journalism resulted in Andrzejewski (who had previously earned the position of a senior policy contributor) being fired by Forbes — which again shows how much influence the pharmaceutical industry has over the media.

    The GAO Investigation
    One of the more honest departments within the Federal Government is the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an agency that serves as Congress’s watchdog and frequently uncovers other branches of the government deliberately concealing their misdeeds (e.g., this occurred when the GAO was assigned to investigate the military’s disastrous experimental anthrax vaccination program).

    As part of the COVID-19 relief bills, the GAO was assigned to investigate the four agencies directly responsible for crafting the COVID-19 response (the FDA, CDC, NIH and ASPR) and attempted to answer a relatively simple question. Did political interference prevent employees within those departments from following policies in accordance with the existing scientific evidence?

    After conducting interviews with employees in each agency, the GAO found many had observed this happen and a few at the CDC and FDA went further to state that: “they felt that the potential political interference they observed resulted in the alteration or suppression of scientific findings.”

    When the GAO asked why the federal employees failed to report these actions, they cited the following reasons:

    They feared retaliation.
    They thought their leadership was already aware of those issues.
    They were unsure how to report issues as no existing policies or procedures existed for making those reports.



    Note: Not having procedures in place to report misconduct is unusual as most large organizations have them and they are often required by the government to (e.g., medicare requires all hospitals receiving its payments to have a way for employees to report fraud).

    When the GAO asked the leadership of those agencies why these necessary policies and procedures were not in place, the only explanation they received was that no reports of political interference had been made so there was no need to have a formalized reporting system for it.

    In turn, I would argue this line of reasoning is not that different from the agencies habitually refusing to honor their promises to be transparent with the bribes they are receiving from the pharmaceutical industry.

    For example, did you know that Moderna’s vaccine was developed by NIH scientists and that the NIH spent 1.4 billion dollars to help Moderna develop and test its vaccine?

    Once I learned this I was relatively sure the vaccine would be approved by the FDA regardless of the red flags that emerged — and despite all the issues that have come to light since that time (along with the fact the vaccine barely works now) those agencies are still trying to push booster after booster for it onto the market.

    In my eyes, one of the most important takeaways from the GAO’s investigation is that there are a lot of good people in these agencies who want to do the right thing, but they are often prevented from doing so because corrupt officials have been appointed to lead these agencies — something which RFK Jr. has also repeatedly found to be the case in his years of litigating against the federal government and the sentiment echoed by many of the personnel in these agencies (e.g., the previously mentioned CDC employees).

    Conclusion
    One of the most common strategies power hungry individuals use to control the masses is to rigidly establish pyramidal hierarchies within the society and then take control of the very top of each of those institutions.

    For example, the premier medical journals have been established as the arbiters of “scientific truth,” and as the years have gone by, they’ve marched more and more in lockstep with Big Pharma — so as you might guess both the journals themselves and their editors receive a lot of money from the pharmaceutical industry.

    This helps to explain why all of them (despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary) refused to publish anything critical of the COVID vaccines or remdesivir. Likewise, as Pierre Kory details within the War on Ivermectin, they refused to publish all the data showing affordable off-patent drugs worked much better than any of the lucrative products being rushed out for the COVID boondoggle.

    In this article, I’ve attempted to show how there has been an increasing tide of corruption within the agencies we have long trusted to look out for our health. This corruption has now metastasized to the point we saw entire government march in lockstep throughout the pandemic in support of the irrational, unscientific and disastrous policies that were implemented throughout COVID-19. In many ways, I feel like we are well on the path to this scene from the iconic movie Idiocracy:



    As much as I’d like to blame the government for the disaster we are witnessing, I think much of it is also a reflection of the culture. For example, Big Pharma and the medical device industry spends a lot of money grooming doctors (now about 20 billion a year) — including over 2500 doctors who’ve received more than half a million dollars from the industry and 700 who’ve received over a million. Remember, that money is only spent because it works.

    All of this I believe is representative of a cycle societies throughout history have been observed to follow:

    Many factors in turn account for the cyclical nature of things; for example, as the times change, the society’s institutions are no longer suited to meet the needs of current era.

    Likewise, when everything works well, citizens often take that for granted and lose the motivation to actively participate in making the society work, which allows the rot in the society’s institutions to fester, whereas once things become bad enough, they become motivated to become active participants in turning things around.

    One of the major factors that goes hand in hand with this cycle is the level of corruption, as once it passes a certain point, the institutions society depends upon prioritize serving whoever is bribing them rather than the society — which rapidly leads to things falling apart. As I have tried to illustrate in this article, we are presently in a period of institutional breakdown which has gone hand in hand with the ever-growing corruption throughout our society.

    At this point, there are now more and more indications the egregiousness of that corruption (especially given how far things went throughout COVID-19), has now begun to open the public’s eyes to the pervasive corruption within our society and that it’s reached the point it is now threatening the stability of the United States.

    In turn, my hope is that this recognition will create the political will to halt the institutional decline our nation is facing — because if it doesn’t, the decline will continue worsen (history has countless examples of the innumerable atrocious things which occur during major institutional declines) and we will likely experience an even greater shock than what was seen during the pandemic.

    A Note From Dr. Mercola About the Author
    A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician in the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate his exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and I'm grateful to share them. I also respect his desire to remain anonymous as he is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD's work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  16. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Alekahn2 (8th October 2023), Ewan (8th October 2023), Harmony (21st October 2023), Pam (8th October 2023), ronny (21st October 2023), Sue (Ayt) (8th October 2023)

  17. Link to Post #29
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    Google, Microsoft, Facebook Among Tech Giants Illegally Harvesting Private Health Information
    10/20/23
    By Mike Capuzzo
    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...tm_id=20231020

    (Hyperlinks in the article not embedded here)



    "Google, Microsoft, Facebook, TikTok and the majority of medical and healthcare websites illegally harvest and sell private health information despite a federal crackdown on the practice, according to a new cybersecurity report by Feroot Security.

    The report, by Toronto-based cybersecurity firm Feroot Security, analyzed hundreds of healthcare websites and found that more than 86% are collecting private data and transferring it to advertisers, marketers and Big Tech social media companies without user consent and in violation of privacy laws.

    As patients or consumers browse their favorite or trusted medical websites or sign in to hospital portals to access their private health records, invisible bits of HTML code — called “tracking pixels” — embedded on the websites harvest private information, such as whether patients have cancer, erectile dysfunction or are behind on their hospital bill.

    The information is repackaged and sold for a variety of uses, including to companies that target individual users with internet ads, according to the report.

    The risk of having personal data scraped is particularly high on log-in and registration pages where internet users supply troves of information, unaware it is being hijacked and sold. More than 73% of log-in and registration pages have invisible trackers that pirate personal health information, the study found.

    Approximately 15% of the tracking pixels analyzed by Feroot record users’ keystrokes, harvesting social security numbers, usernames and passwords, credit card and banking information, and an infinite variety of personal health data, including medical diagnosis and treatment.

    The study showed that “Google is the absolute dominant collector” of data. Ninety-two percent of the websites loaded on the Google search engine contained data-harvesting technology across wide sectors of the U.S. economy including healthcare and telehealth, banking and financial services, airlines, e-commerce, and the federal and state governments.

    The number two offender was Microsoft with 50.4% of websites on its platform hiding tracking tools, with Facebook next at 50.2% percent and TikTok at 7.41% percent and growing fast.

    Google, as the driver of its parent Alphabet, the world’s fourth largest company, is often called “the most powerful company in the world.” It counts on advertising, a lifeblood of the global digital economy, for 80% of its revenue.

    Microsoft and Facebook “round up the Top 3” of companies that systematically breach data, the report said.

    Representatives of Google, Microsoft, and Facebook denied their companies used tracking pixels to harvest personal data.

    Website owners are responsible for controlling data collection, a Google spokesperson said. Google policy prohibits Google Analytics and advertising customers, including for example hospital or telehealth websites, from collecting health data in violation of the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). It’s up to the websites to determine “whether they are HIPAA-regulated entities and what their obligations are under HIPAA,” Google policy says.

    Personal health data collected by a tracker or third party without a user’s consent is a violation of HIPAA, said Feroot CEO Ivan Tsarynny.

    Big Tech companies “do have policies that talk about protecting health info,” Tsarynny said. But “the real-world application of these policies is a different story.”

    Feroot’s study comes as “concern grows regarding data mining companies using pixels/trackers that load into browsers from websites to collect privacy and sensitive user data,” the report stated.

    “Compliance regulators and government authorities are increasingly stepping in with bans, restrictions, and executive orders to curb them.”

    Eighteen major hospital systems were sued this year for sharing patients’ sensitive health data with Google, Facebook and other tech giants in violation of privacy laws, according to Becker’s Hospital Review.

    They include prominent academic medical centers such as the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, the University of Chicago Medical Center, the University of Iowa Medical Center, Chicago-based Northwestern Memorial Hospital and the University of California San Francisco Medical Center.

    Prompted by growing concerns over data theft and the article, “‘Out of Control’: Dozens of Telehealth Startups Sent Sensitive Health Information to Big Tech Companies,” Feroot launched an investigation “to ascertain the exact magnitude and pervasiveness of social media pixels/trackers collecting and transferring personal, sensitive, and private data using pixels or trackers.”

    The security platform Feroot sells to companies “made it possible to get detailed facts regarding active client-side e-skimming,” the company said.

    Feroot collected data on pixels/trackers during an eight-week period in January and February.

    The company said it examined more than 3,675 organizations with unique websites in seven economic sectors. It studied 108,836 unique web pages, including especially vulnerable login, registration and credit card processing pages, 227 trackers and 7 million data transfers.

    Key findings from ‘Beware of Pixels & Trackers’:

    Pixel trackers are “common and abundant” — an average of 13.16 pixels/trackers were found per website, “with Google, Microsoft, Meta (owner of Facebook), ByteDance (owner of TikTok), and Adobe being some of the most common.”
    “Mission-critical” webpages, such as log-in or registration pages, increase the risk of exposing private information. An average of 5.96% of websites had pixels/trackers on webpages reading user input forms containing privacy or sensitive data.
    Pixel trackers transfer data to foreign locations around the globe — “about 5% of the data transferred by pixels/trackers loaded from US-based websites is sent outside the US.”

    Pixel trackers collect and transfer data without first obtaining the explicit consent of visitors.
    Pixels and trackers are loading from domains banned by the U.S. government and various U.S. states and even from some of those same governments, including Russia and China. Data obtained by Russian and Chinese websites is a security risk from surveillance and spying.
    Meta (owner of Facebook and Instagram) and TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, were “particularly worrisome” for privacy invasion and surveillance risks. Thirty-four U.S. states, both Republican and Democratic-controlled, have banned the use of TikTok on government devices. Montana in May banned the app on all personal devices.
    TikTok is often present whether or not the TikTok app is deleted. TikTok pixels/trackers can still “load into webpages handling mission-critical user data and can collect and transfer it.”
    GoodRX case highlights corporate deceit around data-sharing

    While corporations face losing profit and reputation from data breaches or fines for causing them, individuals face a potentially catastrophic loss of privacy when major health websites harvest and sell their information, according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

    In February, the FTC fined popular discount drug and telehealth site GoodRx for “failing to report its unauthorized disclosure of consumer health data to Facebook, Google, and other companies.”

    The action to “bar GoodRx from sharing consumers’ sensitive health information for advertising” was the FTC’s first enforcement action under its Health Breach Notification Rule.

    “Digital health companies and mobile apps should not cash in on consumers’ extremely sensitive and personally identifiable health information,” FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection Director Samuel Levine said in a news release after the settlement. “The FTC is serving notice that it will use all of its legal authority to protect American consumers’ sensitive data from misuse and illegal exploitation.”

    The FTC enforcement against GoodRx revealed a particularly egregious, yet not uncommon, example of how corporate health and medical websites betray patient trust and manipulate patient data, the FTC said.

    According to the FTC’s complaint, GoodRx violated the law by improperly sharing sensitive personal health information since at least 2017, though it promised otherwise.

    The company “deceptively promised its users that it would never share personal health information with advertisers or other third parties,” the FTC charged, and deceptively displayed a seal at the bottom of its telehealth services homepage “falsely suggesting to consumers that it complied with … HIPAA.”

    In reality, the FTC complaint said, GoodRx “monetized its users’ personal health information, and used data it shared with Facebook to target GoodRx’s own users with personalized health- and medication-specific advertisements on Facebook and Instagram.”

    For example, GoodRx in August 2019 made lists of its users “who had purchased particular medications such as those used to treat heart disease and blood pressure, and uploaded their email addresses, phone numbers, and mobile advertising IDs to Facebook so it could identify their profiles,” according to the complaint.

    “GoodRx then used that information to target these users with health-related advertisements.”

    People who accessed GoodRx coupons to purchase, for instance, Viagra would see ads for erectile dysfunction medication on their Facebook or Instagram page ads, the FTC says.

    “Similarly, people who had used GoodRx’s telehealth services to get treatment for sexually transmitted diseases would get ads for STD testing services.”

    GoodRx disclosed to Facebook the medication purchase data it receives from pharmacy benefit managers and also used the data to target ads.

    By using Facebook’s ad targeting platform, the FTC said, “GoodRx designed campaigns that targeted customers with ads based on their health information. For example, if a customer had revealed a possible erectile dysfunction issue to GoodRx, they might have seen an ad on Facebook like Exhibit A in the FTC complaint.”

    Source: Federal Trade Commission complaint
    In February, California-based GoodRx, a $2.1 billion company, paid a $1.5 million civil penalty to the FTC to settle the complaint and denied any wrongdoing.

    Howard Danzig, founder and president of Employers Committed to Control Health Insurance Costs, said “fining GoodRx just $1.5 million dollars is not even a slap on the wrist. While many employers are so vigilant about respecting the guidelines of the HIPAA privacy laws, large tech companies basically get a pass.”

    “How about major penalties for Facebook, Google and any others who were the beneficiaries of this information?” he wrote on his LinkedIn page with almost 9,000 followers.

    “How about determining whether or not there were any criminal violations that should be pursued against the individuals who actually collaborated to do this? How about ‘REPARATIONS’ from the companies involved to the people and customers whose privacy was breached?”

    The data breach occurred for “advertising purposes,” he noted. “How far afield can this really be taken and how far afield has it been taken?”"
    Last edited by onawah; 21st October 2023 at 03:31.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Ewan (21st October 2023), Harmony (21st October 2023), Reinhard (16th November 2023)

  19. Link to Post #30
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    The Genetic Conspiracy: DNA Tests Are Sold to Highest Bidder
    by Dr. Joseph Mercola
    November 07, 2023
    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1958871420

    https://media.mercola.com/ImageServe...bidder-pdf.pdf

    "STORY AT-A-GLANCE
    GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) will pay 23andMe $20 million to extend its five-year contract to mine the company’s consumer DNA data for another year
    The drugmaker is searching for hints about genes that might be at the root of disease. 23andMe will get royalties on any drugs developed
    23andMe also recently launched a new DNA-sequencing service called Total Health, which sequences your entire exome, the protein-coding part of your genome, which is thought to be responsible for most disease-causing genes. The move is another step in 23andMe’s plan to transform itself into a full-fledged health care company that also treats patients
    23andMe acquired a telehealth and drug-delivery startup called Lemonaid Health in 2021. Lemonaid doctors are being trained by 23andMe on how to interpret DNA results and provide tailored health advice
    23andMe’s concept of “health care” is all about expanding the use of drugs by getting people on them earlier, before they even have symptoms, based solely on genetic risk factors

    Do you know who has access to your genetic data? If you've used a DNA testing company like 23andMe, chances are your genetic data is in the hands of insurance companies and drug companies. It may also be in the hands of hackers. Either way, your DNA could be used against you.

    GlaxoSmithKline Extends Data Mining Contract With 23andMe
    As reported by Bloomberg,1 GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) will pay 23andMe $20 million to extend its five-year contract to mine the company's consumer DNA data for another year:

    "The idea for drugmakers is to comb the data for hints about genetic pathways that might be at the root of disease, which could significantly speed up the long, slow process of drug development.

    GSK and 23andMe have already taken one potential medication to clinical trials: a cancer drug that works to block CD96, a protein that helps modulate the body's immune responses.

    It entered that testing phase in four years, compared to an industry average of about seven years. Overall, the partnership between GSK and 23andMe has produced more than 50 new drug targets ...

    The new agreement changes some components of the collaboration. Any discoveries GSK makes with the 23andMe data will now be solely owned by the British pharmaceutical giant, while the genetic-testing company will be eligible for royalties on some projects. In the past, the two companies pursued new drug targets jointly."

    In case this wasn't obvious, YOU pay to have your DNA tested, and then 23andMe sells the mining rights of those data, and makes royalties on new drugs. Quite the profit model, having customers pay for their own exploitation. And GSK isn't the only drug company mining your data. The deal is nonexclusive, so any number of other companies may be mining your genetic data as well.

    23andMe Seeks to Transform Into a Health Care Company
    23andMe also recently launched a new DNA-sequencing service called Total Health, which sequences your entire exome, the protein-coding part of your genome, which is thought to be responsible for most disease-causing genes. While their basic DNA test for health and ancestry has a price tag of $229,2 this expanded test will set you back $1,188 — per year.3

    The move is another step in 23andMe's plan to transform itself into a full-fledged health care company that also treats patients. With this goal in mind, 23andMe acquired a telehealth and drug-delivery startup called Lemonaid Health in 2021.4 Lemonaid doctors are reportedly being trained by 23andMe on how to interpret DNA results and provide tailored health advice. According to Bloomberg:5

    "Total Health is designed to pinpoint genes 23andMe views as 'actionable' — those that some combination of lifestyle changes and medication can affect.

    The list includes the more than 80 genes the American College of Medical Genetics consider actionable, including those for cancer, cardiovascular disease, metabolic disease and neurological disorders ...

    Someone who finds out they're at risk for early heart disease would want to closely monitor their cholesterol levels and consider going on cholesterol-lowering drugs as soon as those levels become unsafe, said [vice president for genomic health at 23andMe, Noura] Abul-Husn, giving an example of how the information can be used ...

    The Total Health package's biannual blood tests give customers a look at more than 50 biomarkers, helping them track progress in managing risks identified by sequencing. Clinicians will provide patients with personalized risk assessments and preventive health plans, along with an annual virtual visit and ongoing messaging ...

    Genetic Predisposition — A Tactic to Increase Drug Sales
    This is an excellent example of why Americans are so mired in chronic illness, and why genetic testing, as it currently stands, will do nothing to ameliorate the situation.

    If you have genetic risk factors for early heart disease, the last thing you want to do is go on cholesterol-lowering drugs as they destroy heart tissue and act as mitochondrial toxins,6,7 Statins also raise your risk of diabetes and dementia.

    Unfortunately, if you do an online search for "statins damage heart" or something similar, the first page or two of results will be articles "debunking" claims that they can harm your heart. This is Big Tech censorship at work, and it's only going to get worse from here. You have to dig deeper into the search results to actually find what you're looking for. Eventually, you may not find it at all.

    23andMe's concept of 'health care' is all about expanding the use of drugs by getting people on them earlier, before they even have symptoms, based solely on genetic risk factors.
    The point here is that cholesterol has little to do with the development of heart disease, so the entire premise of this kind of "prevention" is flawed from the get-go. Basically, 23andMe's concept of "health care" is all about expanding the use of drugs by getting people on them earlier, before they even have symptoms, based solely on genetic risk factors.

    Your Genetic Data Can Be Used Against You in Many Ways
    Adding insult to injury, your genetic data may be sold to insurance companies that may then charge you extra for a "preexisting condition" you don't actually have but might potentially develop in the future. Life insurance companies may also charge you more, or decline coverage altogether. As reported in a September 7, 2023, article in The Conversation:8

    "In Australia, life insurance companies can legally use the results of genetic tests to discriminate. They can decline to provide life insurance coverage, increase the cost of premiums, or place exclusions on an individual's cover ...

    This week, a number of federal parliamentarians argued for a ban on genetic discrimination by life insurance companies ... The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 prohibits discrimination on a number of different bases, including genetic risk factors.

    However, there is a specific carve-out in the Act that allows life insurers to discriminate in ways other entities are prohibited from doing. This means companies providing insurance for death, income protection, and disability can discriminate on the basis of genetic risk of disease.

    Other companies that provide risk-rated insurance (where insurers assess an individual's risk factors and change coverage or premiums based on this risk) can also use genetic test results to discriminate. This includes travel insurance."

    23andMe, the Google of Gene-Based Medicine
    As noted in a November 2013 article by Scientific American,9 23andMe poses a unique threat to the public that few ever discuss. While sold as a medical device, its true function is that of a massive information-gathering operation, just like Google turned out to be.

    While it took a while, it's now become crystal clear that Google is using all that personal data gathered from users to control and suppress information that doesn't benefit its advertisers. Will 23andMe end up being a repeat of Google's bait and switch? As reported by Scientific American:10

    "Although 23andMe admits that it will share aggregate information about users genomes to third parties, it adamantly insists that it will not sell your personal genetic information without your explicit consent. We've heard that one before ...

    Even though 23andMe currently asks permission to use your genetic information for scientific research, the company has explicitly stated that its database-sifting scientific work 'does not constitute research on human subjects,' meaning that it is not subject to the rules and regulations that are supposed to protect experimental subjects' privacy and welfare.

    Those of us who have not volunteered to be a part of the grand experiment have even less protection. Even if 23andMe keeps your genome confidential against hackers, corporate takeovers, and the temptations of filthy lucre forever and ever, there is plenty of evidence that there is no such thing as an 'anonymous' genome anymore.

    It is possible to use the internet to identify the owner of a snippet of genetic information and it is getting easier day by day. While the FDA concentrates on the question of whether 23andMe's kit is a safe and effective medical device, it is failing to address the real issue: what 23andMe should be allowed to do with the data it collects.

    For 23andMe's Personal Genome Service is much more than a medical device; it is a one-way portal into a world where corporations have access to the innermost contents of your cells and where insurers and pharmaceutical firms and marketers might know more about your body than you know yourself.

    And as 23andMe warns on its website, 'Genetic Information that you share with others could be used against your interests. You should be careful about sharing your Genetic Information with others.' Present company excepted, of course."

    For the record, that warning no longer exists on 23andMe's website. In the end, we may well see DNA testing companies like 23andMe share everyone's genetic data with insurance companies, which in turn may force you into pharmaceutical solutions for problems you don't yet have.

    The CIA Connection
    Interestingly, the connection between Google and 23andMe is closer than you might think. 23andMe cofounder Anne Wojcicki was married to Google founder Sergey Brin for eight years and the couple have two children together. They divorced in 2015.

    Wojcicki's sister, Susan Wojcicki, was one of Google's first employees. In 2006, she convinced Google to acquire YouTube and served as YouTube's CEO from 2014 until 2023. She's now an adviser to Google and its parent company Alphabet.11,12

    As reported by Quartz magazine, Google came about largely thanks to research grants for mass surveillance technologies from the CIA and NSA.13

    Similarly, Wojcicki was finally able to take 23andMe public after raising more than $1 billion in funding from, among others, Google, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson and Sequoia Capital,14,15 the latter of which is also heavily invested in artificial intelligence and has drawn scrutiny from Washington for having "significant operations" in China that might benefit the Chinese military.16

    Google — probably the biggest spy machine ever built — the CIA, NSA, Big Pharma and a Chinese-linked AI investment firm. These are all either directly invested in, or linked to through investments, a company (23andMe) that is harvesting the genetic code from millions of Americans. Does that really sound like a good idea?

    You don't need predictive AI to figure out that the beneficiaries of 23andMe's data will be the drug industry and the intelligence agencies that are working to further the transhumanist and technocratic goals and ambitions of the globalist deep state.

    Data Breaches Are Inevitable, and Have Already Occurred
    Data breaches and hacks are becoming ever more prevalent, and 23andMe is not immune to that threat. In fact, in late October 2023, the company notified customers that a breach into its "DNA relatives" databank had occurred. As reported by Reuters:17

    "Genetics testing company 23andMe ... sent emails to several customers to inform them of a breach into the 'DNA Relatives' feature that allowed them to compare ancestry information with users worldwide ...

    Since news of the hack, many customers have expressed worries their ethnicity and other sensitive information could be used against them if leaked."

    While that might sound paranoid, Thor Benson, in a June 2020 IEEE Spectrum article18 argued that "DNA databases in the U.S. and China are tools of racial oppression," and that "What is initially presented as a public good can easily be used for evil ends."

    Your DNA Could Be Used to Pin a Crime on You
    Benson's article focuses not on the use of DNA in medicine but rather its use in law enforcement. DNA samples are routinely collected when you're arrested, and that DNA database is then used during other crime investigations.

    But DNA samples are also collected from victims of crime, and in late 2021, a California rape victim was charged with an unrelated crime based solely on the DNA from her rape kit sample, taken five years earlier. Public outcry ensued, and once the district attorney learned of the source of the DNA, the charges against her were dropped. As reported by Mission Local:19

    "Under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement must obtain a warrant or written permission from a court to lawfully seize evidence. And, in this case, 'It's very clear that they're not consenting to their DNA being collected to use five, 10, 15 years later on in a law enforcement investigation,' [district attorney Chesa] Boudin said."

    California lawmakers have also approved a bill to prohibit the use of DNA collected from victims for any other purpose than to identify the perpetrator of the crime against them.20

    Now, if DNA samples from victims can later be used to tie them to another crime, how do you think DNA samples voluntarily handed over to a DNA testing company may be used? Anyone can essentially be framed for any crime.

    DNA Can Be Used Against Dissidents of All Stripes
    Going back to Benson's article:21

    "A report that was published by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute in mid-June claims that China is operating the 'world's largest police-run DNA database' as part of its powerful surveillance state.

    Chinese authorities have collected DNA samples from possibly as many as 70 million men since 2017, and the total database is believed to contain as many as 140 million profiles. The country hopes to collect DNA from all of its male citizens, as it argues men are most likely to commit crimes.

    DNA is reportedly often collected during what are represented as free physicals, and it's also being collected from children at schools. There are reports of Chinese citizens being threatened with punishment by government officials if they refuse to give a DNA sample.

    Much of the DNA that's been collected has been from Uighur Muslims that have been oppressed by the Chinese government and infamously forced into concentration camps in the Xinjiang province ...

    James Leibold, a nonresident senior fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and one of the authors of the report on China's DNA database, tells Spectrum that he is worried that China building up and utilizing this database could normalize this type of behavior.

    'Global norms around genomic data are currently in a state of flux. China is the only country in the world conducting mass harvesting of DNA data outside a major criminal investigation,' Leibold says. 'It's the only forensic DNA database in the world to contain troves of samples from innocent civilians.'

    Leibold says ethnic minorities like the Uighurs aren't the only ones threatened by this mass DNA collection. He says the database could be used against dissidents and any other people who the government sees as a threat ...

    'We know the Chinese police have planted evidence in the past, and now it is conceivable that they could use planted DNA to convict 'enemies of the state.'"

    In this post-COVID era, you can replace "China" with most Western countries, and "Uighur Muslims" with "anti-vaxxers," whom intelligence agencies have declared "a national security threat." "

    - Sources and References
    1, 3 Bloomberg October 30, 2023
    2 23andme.com
    4, 5 Bloomberg October 25, 2023 (Archived)
    6 Expert Rev Clin Pharmacology March 2015; 8(2): 189-199
    7 The Permanente Journal December 1, 2019
    8 Conversation September 7, 2023
    9, 10 Scientific American November 27, 2013
    11 Forbes Susan Wojcicki Bio
    12, 14 Business Insider February 18, 2023
    13 Quartz December 8, 2017
    15 The Guardian February 9, 2021
    16 Financial Times October 18, 2023
    17 Reuters October 24, 2023
    18, 21 IEEE Spectrum June 30, 2020
    19 Missioion Local February 14, 2022
    20 NPR September 13, 2022
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Harmony (8th November 2023), Reinhard (16th November 2023)

  21. Link to Post #31
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    Flatline: America's Hospital Crisis | NEW Documentary
    The Epoch Times Documentaries
    Nov-10-2023
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/epocht..._campaign=copy

    (Video at the link)

    "America is in a health care crisis that is hurting millions of Americans across the country. More than 200 hospitals nationwide, mostly in rural areas, closed in less than 20 years [1]. Over the next few years, more than 600 rural hospitals—nearly 30 percent of rural hospitals nationwide—are in financial distress and at risk of closing [2].
    When hospitals close, people do not just lose the ability to access critical health care, the ripple effects reach far and wide, with many people losing jobs and local communities left in disarray. Life expectancy goes down while unemployment, crime, poverty, and death rates soar.
    “Flatline: America’s Hospital Crisis” is an Epoch Original Documentary that reveals the devastating situation of the hospital closures across the country, examining the root causes and the major players of this health care epidemic and its impact on the local communities.
    Directed by award-winning investigative journalist, TV broadcaster, and radio host Steve Gruber, the film focuses on the people and the personal stories of what it’s like for local communities to lose hospitals. Through the real-life stories of local residents, former hospital executives, former hospital workers, police officers, a retired judge, and interviews with health care experts and a hospital association executive, “Flatline” tells the story of “America’s Hospital Crisis” up-close and personal.
    The voices of these residents in rural towns are loud and clear, America is facing a national emergency when it comes to health care that needs immediate attention even though it hasn’t received much media coverage to-date. The reality is that more hospitals will close and more lives will be lost if this crisis goes unresolved. This is critical information that every American needs to know and get prepared for, not just when you need to call 911. Longer travel times to hospitals may mean the difference of life or death.
    But as this documentary explores, there are possible solutions and all hope is not lost."

    References:
    [1] The Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research
    [2] Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform Report
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (16th November 2023), Reinhard (16th November 2023)

  23. Link to Post #32
    France Avalon Member Lunesoleil's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th November 2012
    Location
    Alsace (France)
    Language
    uses a translator
    Posts
    1,433
    Thanks
    1,433
    Thanked 6,399 times in 1,199 posts

    Lightbulb Re: Medical Tyranny

    Quote Posted by Anu Raman (here)
    They can't profit off of you if you are not sick.
    How can we trust medicine today after the two-year period of C O V I D ... you have to be crazy to still believe in it...


  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lunesoleil For This Post:

    onawah (28th November 2023), Vicus (16th November 2023)

  25. Link to Post #33
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    47,763
    Thanked 116,603 times in 20,701 posts

    Default Re: Medical Tyranny

    Medical Journals Publishing Tens of Thousands of Fake Scientific Papers
    The Vaccine Reaction
    by Carolyn Hendler, JD
    November 26, 2023
    https://thevaccinereaction.org/2023/...ntific-papers/

    (Medical Tyranny via obfuscation of the facts, leading to confusion, misinformation and malpractice, all in line with the ultimate goal of depopulation.)

    "Medical journals are increasingly riddled with fake scientific papers put out by “paper mills”—profit-oriented organizations that produce and sell fabricated manuscripts or ones containing manipulated scientific data. In the past year, approximately 70,000 (1.5 – 2 percent) of published scientific papers were generated by paper mills. It is estimated that, over the last two decades, paper mills may have churned out as many as 400,000 papers.1

    Newly developed software is able to detect whether a paper was generated by a paper mill to a good degree of certainty by comparing an open index of research papers to works previously produced by paper mills. An estimated three percent of biology and medicine papers closely resembled paper mill works, according to an unpublished analysis shared with Nature. The paper mill papers tend to follow a specific template and only change an image or a few words in the text. Adam Day, developer of the software called Paper Mill Alarm admits that there is no way to know if all of the articles flagged are generated by paper mills.2

    A report by the Committee on Publication Ethics released in June 2022 confirms Day’s findings. The report, which looked at six publishers, found that two percent of papers submitted to journals may have come from paper mills and for some journals, the number may be as high as 40 percent.3

    Other researchers looked at the email address of the submitted paper to see if it is affiliated with a hospital in China, where the fake paper problem is known to be rampant. It is also a red flag when the email address is not affiliated with an academic institution or a hospital.4

    The increasing number of scientific papers being retracted supports these alarming findings. The Retraction Watch Database found that in 2022 more than 4,600 scientific papers were retracted by journals. By comparison, in 2002 journals retracted only 119 papers.5

    “Publish or Perish” Policy Leading to Increase in Fake Scientific Papers
    A recent report in a medRxiv pre-print published in May showed that as many as 34 percent of 5,000 neuroscience papers and 24 percent of medical papers published in 2020 were plagiarized or false.6

    Bernhard Sabel, psychologist and neuroscientist at the University of Magdeburg in Germany and lead author of the report explained:

    'Scientists are often judged by the number of papers they publish, and that is quite common practice everywhere around the world. And all this pressure creates anxiety and fear to not being promoted, to lose the job and so on. And so the best way to solve that, given they have no capacity to do the research, is, as if you’re buying a T-shirt in the shop, you can buy a paper for it to be published in the scientific journal.'7

    Universities can be active participants in perpetuating the problem of fake papers being published. Students are often required to publish as a prerequisite to obtaining a masters or doctorate degree. Professors can earn academic promotions when they are listed as co-authors on published papers, while universities obtain money from research grants based on published papers. All of these incentives can encourage the proliferation of fake scientific papers by researchers eager to advance their careers at universities.8

    The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, which represents 120 publishers, is working on an effort called Integrity Hub to create new ways to detect false papers churned out by paper mills.9

    Joris van Rossum, Integrity Hub’s product director, said:

    'We want to think about engaging with institutions on how to take away perhaps some of the [professional] incentives which can have these detrimental effects.'10

    Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist who studies fraudulent papers at the University of Oxford, said:

    'Paper mills have made a fortune by basically attacking a system that has had no idea how to cope with this stuff.'11 "

    References:
    1 Van Noorden R. How big is science’s fake-paper problem? Nature Nov. 6, 2023.
    2 Ibid.
    3 Ibid.
    4 Ibid.
    5 Retraction Watch. Nearing 5,000 retractions: A review of 2022. Dec. 27, 2022.
    6 Brainard J. Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common. Science May 9, 2023.
    7 Rascoe A. Fake studies in academic journals may be more common than previously thought. NPR May 14, 2023.
    8 Alexander H. How fake science is infiltrating scientific journals. The Sydney Morning Herald Jan. 5, 2022.
    9 Ibid.
    10 Brainard J. Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common. Science May 9, 2023.
    11 Ibid.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts