People around the world are watching as U.K. Judge Vanessa Baraitser hears arguments and decides whether or not to extradite Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange to the U.S.
While the Obama administration chose not to charge Assange, wary of the precedent it might set in criminalizing journalism, the Trump administration indicted him with 18 criminal charges that may land Assange in one of the U.S.’s most notorious prisons for 175 years.
Assange’s Wikileaks has won numerous journalism awards and has never had to retract a single publication despite releasing more than 10 million documents exposing, among other things, U.S. war crimes. Former CIA Director Leon Panetta recently indicated that the ongoingpersecution of Assange is meant to “send a message to others not to do the same thing.”
As the world debates whether Assange is a hero or a traitor, Children’s Health Defense takes a step back to examine some of the things his organization has revealed for those fighting for health and environmental justice.
1. U.S. diplomatic efforts to overturn resistance to GMOs at the behest of Monsanto
Wikileaks published hundreds of diplomatic cables exhibiting attempts by the U.S. to quell opposition to genetically modified organisms or GMOs. As reported by The Guardian, “the cables show U.S. diplomats working directly for GM companies such as Monsanto.”
In a 2007 cable, Craig Stapleton, then U.S. Ambassador to France, advised the U.S. to prepare for economic war with countries unwilling to introduce Monsanto’s GM corn seeds. He recommended the U.S. “calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the E.U.”
Another dispatch, this one from 2009, demonstrated that the U.S. funded a GMO workshop in Mozambique that, according to the authors, helped advance biotech-friendly policies in the country.
In another cable from 2009, a U.S. diplomat stationed in Germany relayed intelligence on Bavarian political parties to several U.S. federal agencies and the U.S. Secretary of Defense, telling them which parties opposed Monsanto’s M810 corn seed and tactics that the U.S. could impose to resolve the opposition.
One cable from Hong Kong shows a State Department employee requesting $92,000 in U.S. public funds for “media education kits” to combat a growing popular movement calling for the labeling of GMO foods in Hong Kong. The cable indicates a desire to “make it much more difficult for mandatory labelling advocates to prevail.” The State Department’s Anita Katial, who wrote the cable, also recalled a time when her office facilitated the sending of pro-biotech and bio-agriculture DVDs to every high school in Hong Kong.
According to Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter, the trove of cables “really gets down to twisting the arms of countries and working to undermine local democratic movements that may be opposed to biotech crops, and pressuring foreign governments to also reduce the oversight of biotech crops.”
2. Multinational commodities trader dumping toxic waste in West Africa
In 2006, Trafigura, the world’s second largest oil trader, illegally discharged more than 500 tons of highly toxic oil waste near the Port of Abidjan in the Ivory Coast. Some of the dump sites were near agriculture fields or water supplies, and the UN estimates that more than 100,000 people sought medical treatment due to the incident. Wikileaks would later call this incident “possibly the most culpable mass contamination incident since Bhopal.”
Trafigura’s lawyer commissioned a confidential study that listed what the environmental and health impacts of the dumping incident would be after people living near the port started flooding hospitals.
The report explained that contact with the offloaded compounds could lead to eye damage, lung damage, skin burns, headaches, breathing difficulty, permanent skin ulceration, coma and death. The report also states that the chemical compounds would have a “severe and negative effect” on the environment.
As recently as 2016, residents were complaining about the smell of the waste, headaches, breathing problems and skin problems.
Wikileaks published the classified report in 2009, the first time the public could see the company’s true negligence.
3. Gates Foundation sees environmental activists as a threat
In 2008, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hired an intelligence firm called Stratfor to put together a “threat assessment report” and determine current and future threats to the foundation.
Stratfor’s report saw environmental activists, indigenous farming groups, and peasant political parties in Asia and South America, as “potential threats” to the foundation.
“Threats to the foundation are likely to be directly related to the public association between the foundation and a controversial issue such as GMOs, animal testing, clinical trials and reproductive rights,” the report reads.
Stating that the primary threat to the foundation’s agriculture program comes from its work promoting GMOs, the report notes the rise of anti-GMO campaigning in developing countries, including a “staunch opposition to GMOs in India.” It even names specific activists, such as the U.S.-based anti-GMO campaigner Jeffrey Smith.
The report also mentions the work of large organizations like Greenpeace and PETA as well as alternative media outlets like the Center for Public Integrity, Mother Jones, AlterNet and the LA Times, which had just published a seriesaccusing the foundation of “reap[ing] vast financial gains from investments in companies that contribute to the human suffering in health, housing and social welfare.”
Wikileaks published the threat assessment as part of its release of more than 5 million Stratfor emails in 2012.
4. Pharma intel and espionage operation
In 1996, Pfizer, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, conducted clinical trials in Nigeria for an antibiotic called Trovan. The results were devastating, as Nigerian officials reported more than 50 children died in the experiment and dozens became disabled.
In 2006, a Nigerian government panel concluded that Pfizer violated international law and called the experiment “an illegal trial of an unregistered drug.” In 2007, Nigerian state and federal authorities sued Pfizer for $7 billion, alleging the company did not have proper consent from the children’s parents.
A 2009 U.S. diplomatic cable published by Wikileaks revealed that while the case was in federal court, Pfizer had hired a private intelligence firm to get blackmail on Nigerian Attorney General Michael Aondoakaa.
According to the cable, “Pfizer’s investigators were passing this information to local media,” who published articles on the attorney general’s “alleged” corruption. “Aondoakaa’s cronies were pressuring him to drop the suit for fear of further negative articles,” it reads.
A few months after the negative articles, the Nigerian ministry of justice signed a settlement with Pfizer.
5. U.S. is a climate bully
Cables disclosed by Wikileaks in 2010 present the U.S. using what The Guardian called “spying, threats and promises of aid” to get international support for the 2009 Copenhagen Accord — an industry-friendly international climate deal with non-binding agreements to lower emissions. (Climate activist Naomi Klein described, at the time, the accord as “nothing more than a grubby pact between the world’s biggest emitters”.)
The State Department sent a secret cable to foreign embassies seeking human intelligence, or “dirt,” on UN diplomats regarding climate policy. And, as reported by Democracy Now!, the cables also indicated that the U.S. cut funding to Bolivia and Ecuador after both governments opposed the accord.
Bill McKibben, founder of the climate organization 350.org, said the cables exposed that “the U.S. was both bullying and buying countries into endorsing their do-little position on climate.”
6. International organizations consulting with Big Pharma
In 2009, Wikileaks revealed documents that the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) gave its members a report by the UN’s World Health Organization(WHO)’s Expert Working Group on research and development financing.
IFPMA members include pharmaceutical giants like Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi, and the organization represents these entities when dealing with the UN. What makes the Wikileaks document dump significant is that the working group gave IFPMA access to these documents months before their scheduled public release, suggesting that the UN’s health expert group was more accountable to the pharmaceutical industry than to its own member states.
“The compilation of documents shows the influence of ‘Big Pharma’ on the policy making decisions of the WHO,” Wikileaks commented when publishing the files.
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” ~ William Shakespeare
By Catherine Austin Fitts
I am not a scientist. I am not a doctor. I am not a biotech engineer. I am not an attorney. However, I read, listen, appreciate, and try to understand those who are.
I was an investment banker until politics made it impossible to continue to practice my art. I was trained as a portfolio strategist—so I map my world by watching the financial flows and allocation of resources. I was also trained as a conspiracy generator and foot soldier—conspiracies being the fundamental organizing principle of how things get done in our world. It was not until I left the establishment that I learned that those not in the club had been trained to disparage and avoid conspiracies—a clever trick that sabotages their efforts to gather power.
My response to living at war with agencies of the U.S. government for a time was to answer the questions of people who were sufficiently courageous and curious to solicit my opinion. Over many years, that response transformed into two businesses. One was The Solari Report, which continues to grow as a global intelligence network—we seek to help each other understand and navigate what is happening and contribute to positive outcomes. The other was serving as an investment advisor to individuals and families through Solari Investment Advisory Services. After ten years, I converted that business to doing an ESG screen. What those who use it want—that is not otherwise readily available in the retail market—is a screen that reflects knowledge of financial and political corruption. Tracking the metastasizing corruption is an art, not a science.
When you help a family with their finances, it is imperative to understand all their risk issues. Their financial success depends on successful mitigation of all the risks—whether financial or non-financial—that they encounter in their daily lives. Non-financial risks can have a major impact on the allocation of family resources, including attention, time, assets, and money.
Many of my clients and their children had been devastated and drained by health care failures and corruption—and the most common catalyst for this devastation was vaccine death and injury. After their lengthy and horrendous experiences with the health care establishment, they would invariably ask, “If the corruption is this bad in medicine, food, and health, what is going on in the financial world?” Chilled by the thought, they would search out a financial professional who was schooled in U.S. government and financial corruption. And they would find me.
The result of this flow of bright, educated people blessed with the resources to pay for my time was that, for ten years, I got quite an education about the disabilities and death inflicted on our children by what I now call “the great poisoning.” I had the opportunity to repeatedly price out the human damage to all concerned—not just the affected children but their parents, siblings, and future generations—mapping the financial costs of vaccine injury again and again and again. These cases were not as unusual as you might expect. Studies indicate that 54% of American children have one or more chronic diseases. Doctors who I trust tell me that number is actually much higher, as many children and their families cannot afford the care and testing necessary to properly diagnose what ails them.
One of the mothers featured in VAXXED—a must-watch documentary for any awake citizen, as is its sequel VAXXED II: The People’s Truth—estimated that a heavily autistic child would cost present value $5MM to raise and care for over a lifetime. When my clients who were grandparents insisted that they would not interfere with their children’s vaccine choices because it was “none of their business,” I would say, “Really? Who has the $5MM? You or your kids? When your kids need the $5MM to raise their vaccine-injured child, are you going to refuse them? You are the banker, and it is your money that is at risk here, so it is your business. Do you want to spend that $5MM on growing a strong family through the generations or on managing a disabled child who did not have to be disabled?” Often, that $5MM in expenditures also translates into divorce, depression, and lost opportunities for siblings.
My clients helped me find the best resources—books, documentaries, articles—on vaccines. You will find many of them linked or reviewed at The Solari Report, including in our Library.
Of all the questions that I had, the one that I spent the most time researching and thinking about was why. Why was the medical establishment intentionally poisoning generations of children? Many of the writers who researched and wrote about vaccine injury and death assumed it was an aberration—resulting from the orthodoxy of a medical establishment that could not face or deal with its mistakes and liabilities. That never made sense to me. Writings by Forrest Maready, Jon Rappoport, Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Arthur Firstenberg have helped me understand the role of vaccines in the con man trick of saving money for insurance companies and the legally liable.
Here is one example of how the trick may play out. A toxin creates a disease. The toxin might be pesticides or industrial pollution or wireless technology radiation. The toxin damages millions of people and their communities. Companies or their insurance provider may be liable for civil or criminal violations. Then a virus is blamed. A “cure” is found in a “vaccine.” The pesticide or other toxic exposure is halted just as the vaccine is introduced, and presto, the sickness goes away. The vaccine is declared a success, and the inventor is declared a hero. A potential financial catastrophe has been converted to a profit, including for investors and pension funds. As a portfolio strategist, I admit it has been a brilliant trick and likely has protected the insurance industry from the bankrupting losses it would experience if it had to fairly compensate the people and families destroyed.
Thanks to the work of Robert Kennedy and Mary Holland of Children’s Health Defense, I now understand the enormous profits generated by so-called “vaccines” subsequent to the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the creation of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program—a federal no-fault mechanism for compensating vaccine-related injuries or deaths by establishing a claim procedure involving the United States Court of Federal Claims and special masters. Call a drug or biotech cocktail a “vaccine,” and pharmaceutical and biotech companies are free from any liabilities—the taxpayer pays. Unfortunately, this system has become an open invitation to make billions from “injectibles,” particularly where government regulations and laws can be used to create a guaranteed market through mandates. As government agencies and legislators as well as the corporate media have developed various schemes to participate in the billions of profits, significant conflicts of interest have resulted.
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA or the PREP Act) became law in 2005, adding to corporate freedoms from liability. The Act “is a controversial tort liability shield intended to protect vaccine manufacturers from financial risk in the event of a declared public health emergency. The act specifically affords to drug makers immunity from potential financial liability for clinical trials of . . . vaccine at the discretion of the Executive branch of government. PREPA strengthens and consolidates the oversight of litigation against pharmaceutical companies under the purview of the secretary of Health and Human Services.” (~ Wikipedia)
Over time, this has evolved to the engineering of epidemics—the medical version of false flags. In theory, these can be “psyops” or events engineered with chemical warfare, biowarfare, or wireless technology. If this sounds strange, dive into all the writings of the “Targeted Individuals.”
I learned about this first-hand when I was litigating with the Department of Justice and was experiencing significant physical harassment. I tried to hire several security firms; they would check my references and then decline the work, saying it was too dangerous. The last one took pity and warned me not to worry about electronic weaponry, letting me know that my main problem would be low-grade biowarfare. This biowarfare expert predicted that the opposing team would drill holes in the wall of my house and inject the “invisible enemy.” Sure enough, that is exactly what happened. I sold my house and left town. That journey began a long process of learning how poisoning and nonlethal weapons are used—whether to move people out of rent-controlled apartments, sicken the elderly to move them to more expensive government-subsidized housing, gangstalk political or business targets, or weaken or kill litigants—and the list goes on. Poisoning turned out to be a much more common tactic in the game of political and economic warfare in America than I had previously understood.
After I finished my litigation, I spent several years detoxing from heavy metal toxicity—including from lead, arsenic, and aluminum. As I drove around America, I realized it was not just me. Americans increasingly looked like a people struggling with high loads of heavy metals toxicity. In the process of significantly decreasing my unusually high levels of heavy metals, I learned what a difference the toxic load had made to my outlook, my energy, and my ability to handle complex information.
This brings me to the question of what exactly a vaccine is and what exactly is in the concoctions being injected into people today as well as the witches’ brews currently under development.
In 2017, Italian researchers reviewed the ingredients of 44 types of so-called “vaccines.” They discovered heavy metal debris and biological contamination in every human vaccine they tested. The researchers stated, “The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us.” They then drew the obvious conclusion, namely, that because the micro- and nanocontaminants were “neither biocompatible nor biodegradable,” they were “biopersistent” and could cause inflammatory effects right away—or later (http://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/IJVV-04-00072.pdf)
Whatever the ingredients of vaccines have been to date, nothing is more bizarre and unsettling than the proposals of what might be included in them in the future. Strategies—already well-funded and well on the way—include brain-machine interface nanotechnology, digital identity tracking devices, and technology with an expiration date that can be managed and turned off remotely. One report indicates that the Danish government and U.S. Navy had been paying a tech company in Denmark to make an injectible chip that would be compatible with one of the leading cryptocurrencies.
I was recently reading Mary Holland’s excellent 2012 review of U.S. vaccine court decisions (“Compulsory vaccination, the Constitution, and the hepatitis B mandate for infants and young children,” Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics) and I froze and thought, “Why are we calling the injectibles that Bill Gates and his colleagues are promoting ‘vaccines’? Are they really vaccines?”
Most people are familiar with how Bill Gates made and kept his fortune. He acquired an operating system that was loaded into your computer. It was widely rumored that the U.S. intelligence agencies had a back door. The simultaneous and sudden explosion of computer viruses then made it necessary to regularly update your operating system, allowing Gates and his associates to regularly add whatever they wanted into your software. One of my more knowledgeable software developers once said to me in the 1990s—when Microsoft really took off—”Microsoft makes really sh***y software.” But of course, the software was not really their business. Their business was accessing and aggregating all of your data. Surveillance capitalism was underway.
The Department of Justice launched an antitrust case against Microsoft in 1998, just as the $21 trillion started to disappear from the U.S. government—no doubt with the help of specially designed software and IT systems. During the settlement negotiations that permitted Gates to keep his fortune, he started the Gates Foundation and his new philanthropy career. I laughed the other day when my tweet of one of Robert Kennedy Jr.’s articles from Children’s Health Defense—describing the gruesome technology Gates is hoping to roll out through “injectibles”—inspired a response: “Well, I guess he is finally fulfilling his side of his antitrust settlement.”
If you look at what is being created and proposed in the way of injectibles, it looks to me like these technological developments are organized around several potential goals.
The first and most important goal is the replacement of the existing U.S. dollar currency system used by the general population with a digital transaction system that can be combined with digital identification and tracking. The goal is to end currencies as we know them and replace them with an embedded credit card system that can be integrated with various forms of control, potentially including mind control. “De-dollarization” is threatening the dollar global reserve system. The M1 and M2 money supply have increased in the double digits over the last year as a result of a new round of quantitative easing by the Fed. The reason we have not entered into hyperinflation is because of the dramatic drop in money velocity occasioned by converting Covid-19 into an engineered shutdown of significant economic activity and the bankrupting of millions of small and medium-sized businesses. The managers of the dollar system are under urgent pressure to use new technology to centralize economic flows and preserve their control of the financial system.
Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates.
Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectible credit cards or injectible surveillance trackers or injectable brain-machine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do. As well, they can insist that U.S. taxpayers fund, through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, the damages for which they would otherwise be liable as a result of their experiments—and violations of the Nuremberg Code and numerous civil and criminal laws—on the general population. The scheme is quite clever. Get the general population to go along with defining their new injectible high-tech concoctions as “vaccines,” and they can slip them right into the vaccine pipeline. No need to worry about the disease and death that will result from something this unnatural delivered this quickly. The freedom from liability guaranteed by the PREP Act through the declaration of an emergency—and the ability to keep the emergency going through contact tracing—can protect them from liability for thousands if not millions of deaths and disabilities likely to follow such human experimentation. Ideally, they can just blame the deaths on a virus.
A colleague once told me how Webster’s Dictionary came about. Webster said that the way the evildoers would change the Constitution was not by amending it but by changing the definitions—a legal sneak attack.
I believe that Gates and the pharma and biotech industries are literally reaching to create a global control grid by installing digital interface components and hooking us up to Microsoft’s new $10 billion JEDI cloud at the Department of Defense as well as Amazon’s multibillion cloud contract for the CIA that is shared with all U.S. intelligence agencies. Why do you think President Trump has the military organizing to stockpile syringes for vaccines? It is likely because the military is installing the roaming operating system for integration into their cloud. Remember—the winner in the AI superpower race is the AI system with access to the most data. Accessing your body and my body on a 24/7 basis generates a lot of data. If the Chinese do it, the Americans will want to do it, too. In fact, the rollout of human “operating systems” may be one of the reasons why the competition around Huawei and 5G telecommunications has become so fractious. As Frank Clegg, former President of Microsoft Canada has warned us, 5G was developed by the Israelis for crowd control.
In the face of global “de-dollarization,” this is how the dollar syndicate can assert the central control it needs to maintain and extend its global reserve currency financial power. This includes protecting its leadership from the civil and criminal liability related to explosive levels of financial and health care fraud in recent decades.
Which brings me back to you and me. Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectible surveillance components are not medicine. Injectible credit cards are not medicine. An injectible brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Legal and financial immunity for insurance companies does not create human immunity from disease.
We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.
The perpetrators of this fraud are trying a very neat trick—one that will help them go much faster and cancel out a lot of risk—at our expense. I understand why they are doing it.
What I don’t understand is why we are helping them. Why are we acquiescing in calling these bizarre and deeply dangerous concoctions “vaccines”? Whatever they are, they are not medicine.
So, what shall our naming convention be? What name shall we give to the relevant poisons, neurologically damaging metals, and digital shackles?
Whatever we call them, I know one thing. THEY ARE NOT MEDICINE, WHICH MEANS THEY SURE ARE NOT VACCINES.
On Friday, July 31, in a column ostensibly dealing with health care “misinformation,” Washington Post media critic Margaret Sullivan opened by lambasting “fringe doctors spouting dangerous falsehoods about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 wonder cure.”
Actually, it was Sullivan who was spouting dangerous falsehoods about this drug, something the Washington Post and much of the rest of the media have been doing for months. On May 15, the Post offered a stark warning to any Americans who may have taken hope in a possible therapy for COVID-19. In the newspaper’s telling, there was nothing unambiguous about the science — or the politics — of hydroxychloroquine: “Drug promoted by Trump as coronavirus game-changer increasingly linked to deaths,” blared the headline. Written by three Post staff writers, the story asserted that the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 is scant and that the drug is inherently unsafe.
This claim is nonsense
Biased against the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 — and the Washington Post is hardly alone — the paper described an April 21, 2020, drug study on U.S. Veterans Affairs patients hospitalized with the illness. It found a high death rate in patients taking the drug hydroxychloroquine. But this was a flawed study with a small sample, the main flaw being that the drug was given to the sickest patients who were already dying because of their age and severe pre-existing conditions. This study was quickly debunked. It had been posted on a non-peer-reviewed medical archive that specifically warns that studies posted on its website should not be reported in the media as established information.
Yet, the Post and countless other news outlets did just the opposite, making repeated claims that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective and caused serious cardiac problems. Nowhere was there any mention of the fact that COVID-19 damages the heart during infection, sometimes causing irregular and sometimes fatal heart rhythms in patients not taking the drug.
To a media unrelentingly hostile to Donald Trump, this meant that the president could be portrayed as recklessly promoting the use of a “dangerous” drug. Ignoring the refutation of the VA study in its May 15 article, the Washington Post cited a Brazil study published on April 24 in which a COVID trial using chloroquine (a related but different drug than hydroxychloroquine) was stopped because 11 patients treated with it died. The reporters never mentioned another problem with that study: The Brazilian doctors were giving their patients lethal cumulative doses of the drug.
On and on it has gone since then, in a circle of self-reinforcing commentary. Following the news that Trump was taking the drug himself, opinion hosts on cable news channels launched continual attacks on both hydroxychloroquine and the president. “This will kill you!” Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto exclaimed. “The president of the United States just acknowledge that he is taking hydroxychloroquine, a drug that [was] meant really to treat malaria and lupus.”
Washington Post reporters Ariana Cha and Laurie McGinley were back again on May 22, with a new article shouting out the new supposed news: “Antimalarial drug touted by President Trump is linked to increased risk of death in coronavirus patients, study says.” The media uproar this time was based on a large study just published in the Lancet. There was just one problem. The Lancet paper was fraudulent and it was quickly retracted.
However, the damage from the biased media storm was done and it was long-lasting. Continuing patient enrollment needed for early-use clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine dried up within a week. Patients were afraid to take the drug, doctors became afraid to prescribe it, pharmacies refused to fill prescriptions, and in a rush of incompetent analysis and non-existent senior leadership, the FDA revoked its Emergency Use Authorization for the drug.
So what is the real story on hydroxychloroquine? Here, briefly, is what we know:
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, a search was made for suitable antiviral therapies to use as treatment until a vaccine could be produced. One drug, hydroxychloroquine, was found to be the most effective and safe for use against the virus. Federal funds were used for clinical trials of it, but there was no guidance from Dr. Anthony Fauci or the NIH Treatment Guidelines Panel on what role the drug would play in the national pandemic response. Fauci seemed to be unaware that there actually was a national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses.
Following a careful regimen developed by doctors in France, some knowledgeable practicing U.S. physicians began prescribing hydroxychloroquine to patients still in the earlyphase of COVID infection. Its effects seemed dramatic. Patients still became sick, but for the most part they avoided hospitalization. In contrast — and in error — the NIH-funded studies somehow became focused on giving hydroxychloroquine to late-presenting hospitalized patients. This was in spite of the fact that unlike the drug’s early use in ambulatory patients, there was no real data to support the drug’s use in more severe hospitalized patients.
By April, it was clear that roughly seven days from the time of the first onset of symptoms, a COVID-19 infection could sometimes progress into a more radical late phase of severe disease with inflammation of the blood vessels in the body and immune system over-reactions. Many patients developed blood clots in their lungs and needed mechanical ventilation. Some needed kidney dialysis. In light of this pathological carnage, no antiviral drug could be expected to show much of an effect during this severe second stage of COVID.
On April 6, 2020, an international team of medical experts published an extensive study of hydroxychloroquine in more than 130,000 patients with connective tissue disorders. They reaffirmed that hydroxychloroquine was a safe drug with no serious side effects. The drug could safely be given to pregnant women and breast-feeding mothers. Consequently, countries such as China, Turkey, South Korea, India, Morocco, Algeria, and others began to use hydroxychloroquine widely and early in their national pandemic response. Doctors overseas were safely prescribing the drug based on clinical signs and symptoms because widespread testing was not available.
However, the NIH promoted a much different strategy for the United States. The “Fauci Strategy” was to keep early infected patients quarantined at home without treatment until they developed a shortness of breath and had to be admitted to a hospital. Then they would they be given hydroxychloroquine. The Food and Drug Administration cluelessly agreed to this doctrine and it stated in its hydroxychloroquine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that “hospitalized patients were likely to have a greater prospect of benefit (compared to ambulatory patients with mild illness).”
In reality just the opposite was true. This was a tragic mistake by Fauci and FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn and it was a mistake that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in the days to come.
At the same time, accumulating data showed remarkable results if hydroxychloroquine were given to patients early, during a seven-day window from the time of first symptom onset. If given during this window, most infections did not progress into the severe, lethal second stage of the disease. Patients still got sick, but they avoided hospitalization or the later transfer to an intensive care unit. In mid-April a high-level memo was sent to the FDA alerting them to the fact that the best use for hydroxychloroquine was for its early use in still ambulatory COVID patients. These patients were quarantined at home but were not short of breath and did not yet require supplemental oxygen and hospitalization.
Failing to understand that COVID-19 could be a two-stage disease process, the FDA ignored the memo and, as previously mentioned, it withdrew its EUA for hydroxychloroquine based on flawed studies and clinical trials that were applicable only to late-stage COVID patients.
By now, however, some countries had already implemented early, aggressive, outpatient community treatment with hydroxychloroquine and within weeks were able to minimize their COVID deaths and bring their national pandemic under some degree of control.
In countries such as Great Britain and the United States, where the “Fauci-Hahn Strategy” was followed, there was a much higher death rate and an ever-increasing number of cases. COVID patients in the U.S. would continue to be quarantined at home and left untreated until they developed shortness of breath. Then they would be admitted to the hospital and given hydroxychloroquine outside the narrow window for the drug’s maximum effectiveness.
In further contrast, countries that started out with the “Fauci-Hahn Doctrine” and then later shifted their policy towards aggressive outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, after a brief lag period also saw a stunning rapid reduction in COVID mortality and hospital admissions.
Finally, several nations that had started using an aggressive early-use outpatient policy for hydroxychloroquine, including France and Switzerland, stopped this practice when the WHO temporarily withdrew its support for the drug. Five days after the publication of the fake Lancet study and the resulting media onslaught, Swiss politicians banned hydroxychloroquine use in the country from May27 until June 11, when it was quickly reinstated.
The consequences of suddenly stopping hydroxychloroquine can be seen by examining a graph of the Case Fatality Ratio Index (nrCFR) for Switzerland. This is derived by dividing the number of daily new COVID fatalities by the new cases resolved over a period with a seven-day moving average. Looking at the evolution curve of the CFR it can be seen that during the weeks preceding the ban on hydroxychloroquine, the nrCFR index fluctuated between 3% and 5%.
Following a lag of 13 days after stopping outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, the country’s COVID-19 deaths increased four-fold and the nrCFR index stayed elevated at the highest level it had been since early in the COVID pandemic, oscillating at over 10%-15%. Early outpatient hydroxychloroquine was restarted June 11 but the four-fold “wave of excess lethality” lasted until June 22, after which the nrCFR rapidly returned to its background value.
Here in our country, Fauci continued to ignore the ever accumulating and remarkable early-use data on hydroxychloroquine and he became focused on a new antiviral compound named remdesivir. This was an experimental drug that had to be given intravenously every day for five days. It was never suitable for major widespread outpatient or at-home use as part of a national pandemic plan. We now know now that remdesivir has no effect on overall COVID patient mortality and it costs thousands of dollars per patient.
Hydroxychloroquine, by contrast, costs 60 cents a tablet, it can be taken at home, it fits in with the national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses, and a course of therapy simply requires swallowing three tablets in the first 24 hours followed by one tablet every 12 hours for five days.
There are now 53 studies that show positive results of hydroxychloroquine in COVID infections. There are 14 global studies that show neutral or negative results — and 10 of them were of patients in very late stages of COVID-19, where no antiviral drug can be expected to have much effect. Of the remaining four studies, two come from the same University of Minnesota author. The other two are from the faulty Brazil paper, which should be retracted, and the fake Lancet paper, which was.
Millions of people are taking or have taken hydroxychloroquine in nations that have managed to get their national pandemic under some degree of control. Two recent, large, early-use clinical trials have been conducted by the Henry Ford Health System and at Mount Sinai showing a 51% and 47% lower mortality, respectively, in hospitalized patients given hydroxychloroquine. A recent study from Spain published on July 29, two days before Margaret Sullivan’s strafing of “fringe doctors,” shows a 66% reduction in COVID mortality in patients taking hydroxychloroquine. No serious side effects were reported in these studies and no epidemic of heartbeat abnormalities.
This is ground-shaking news. Why is it not being widely reported? Why is the American media trying to run the U.S. pandemic response with its own misinformation?
Steven Hatfill is a veteran virologist who helped establish the Rapid Hemorrhagic Fever Response Teams for the National Medical Disaster Unit in Kenya, Africa. He is an adjunct assistant professor in two departments at the George Washington University Medical Center where he teaches mass casualty medicine. He is principle author of the prophetic book “Three Seconds Until Midnight — Preparing for the Next Pandemic,” published by Amazon in 2019.
ER Editor: Of course, these claims cannot be verified given the anonymous nature of the source. Yet, it all has a ring of truth. Trump’s revealed he’s using hydroxychloroquine prophylactically (kudos – was he dropping us a hint?), so why would doctors, such as those hired for an American president no less, not be giving the same advice to other notables? Anything else makes little sense.
Note how this person calls COVID-19 a ‘bioweapon’ in ‘unrelenting launches of the COVID-19 bioweapon’ and ‘coronavirus cluster explosions will be detonated’. We only hope that herd immunity may short-circuit his/her predictions. The hypothesis that ‘Covid-19’ is in fact a bioweapon is something we’ve published on at length.
Anonymous D.C. Insider Exposes Ultra-Secret Covid Conspiracy Inside the Beltway
STATE OF THE NATION
Submitted by an Anonymous D.C. Insider
Big Pharma and the WHO have known all along about the HCQ cure for COVID-19.
Everyone at the CDC, NIH and FDA knows that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is the silver bullet for the coronavirus.
They also know that, when combined with azithromycin and zinc, the 3-in-1 protocol provides the magic formula for almost anyone with coronavirus disease.
However, what Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx and Robert Redfield are not telling anyone is that practically every VIP in Washington, D.C. is using HCQ prophylactically.
Everyone knows that Trump has been using it as a preventative as he publicly stated so on multiple occasions. But no one has revealed that virtually everyone inside the Beltway is also using it. That’s why they were all shown so often in groups with no masks and not adhering to the recommended social distancing guidelines during the regular coronavirus briefings. And, they did many of those dog and pony shows right in the middle of the Covid spikes during the first wave.
The real scandal here is that leading politicians, government officials, corporate CEOs and UN administrators all know about the efficacy of HCQ, and yet they have collaborated to deprive the American people of its use. All the while they, themselves, are secretly taking HCQ prophylactically.
When so many countries around the globe have used Hydroxychloroquine with great success, why is the U.S. fiercely resisting it?
Because the world’s most zealous vaccine salesman — Bill Gates — is determined to bring a COVID-19 vaccine to market. Word on the street (K Street) is that Gates is also taking HCQ as a preventive.In fact, he has taken HCQ as a precautionary measure to avoid malaria for many years during his travels to the Third World nations that were subjected to his endless vaccine pitches and vaccination programs.
If Americans knew that India was successfully using HCQ nationwide, how would they react? New Delhi has even made the decision to make HCQ available as a prophylactic, so inexpensive is it.
“India is estimated to produce 70% of the world’s hydroxychloroquine, with Ipca Labs and Zydus Cadila the two largest producers of the drug in the country.
Key government officials, medical authorities and elected representatives throughout the USA are aware of every single fact stated in this exposé. Nevertheless, they are pushing untested remedies and dangerous protocols that have actually killed many COVID-19 patients in all 50 states.
This situation is completely unacceptable. Especially when the leaders of the national coronavirus response are taking HCQ and other effective prophylactics to keep the coronavirus at bay. The same goes for many in the mainstream media; they will never tell anyone either that they’re taking HCQ. Nor will the Sultans of Silicon Valley or Wall Street banksters or Corporate America moguls ever let on to this “ultra-secret conspiracy”. Which is why the Hamptons Concert With Goldman CEO, ‘Chainsmokers’ Faces N.Y. Probe. Goldman Sachs Chairman of the Board David Solomon obviously felt immune to catching Covid even at a concert where he was the star of the show.
But what’s the real scandal here?
The HCQ-Azithromycin-Zinc protocol is being deliberately withheld from the American people so that a mandatory COVID-19 vaccine can be foisted on the country.
And, the proof of such a criminal conspiratorial plot: there will be never-ending seasonal Covid spikes, with each wave being bigger and more intense than the previous one. When those start to ebb, coronavirus cluster explosions will be detonated in the major metro areas, particularly the sanctuary cities.
Then, when the blue states have had enough, the Democrat governors will collude with their Democrat legislatures to mandate an annual Covid vaccination (just like California recently passed draconian legislation requiring yearly compliance with childhood vaccination schedules). The unrelenting launches of the COVID-19 bioweapon in conservative territory will eventually compel the Republican governors to do the same in the red states.
— An Anonymous D.C. Insider
SOTN Editor’s Note: The end result of this phase of OPERATION COVID-19 is the undeclared state of medical martial law. Next will begin the initial stages of the Orwellian takeover scheme COVID-1984, which has been greatly advanced via the staged race riots and growing buzz about an impending race war. However, only if the American people allow them to will these treasonous plans gain any meaningful traction.
“We are talking about private contracts outside the scope of government. We’re talking about local barter, and the issuing of local currencies, the building of private money systems. During the Great Depression, many citizens looked around and said, ‘We still have land and food, we still have commodities. Nothing has changed here. We just have to invent a way to conduct commerce among ourselves.’ One estimate states that, during the Depression of the 1930s, there were 1500 private money systems across America.” (My notes for “The Underground”)
I have made my case concerning the fake pandemic. Many times now.
From the beginning—the failure to isolate, purify, or actually discover a novel coronavirus by correct procedures. The meaningless diagnostic tests and the meaningless case numbers. The propaganda. The use of “the virus” as a cover story obscuring high-level corporate and government crimes.
Of course, many people believe in the COVID-19 virus. And of these, some have been seeking treatments outside the bounds of government certification.
This is their right. They are exercising freedom in managing their own health. And so some of them are taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ).
The FDA, which certifies all medical drugs as safe and effective, before they are released for public use, has not recommended HCQ for COVID treatment. It has banned the drug for that purpose, outside of hospitals and clinical trials.
The FDA‘s track record—which I’ve been documenting for the past 25 years—is a horror show. The first key review I became aware of was authored in 2000, by Dr. Barbara Starfield, and published on July 26th of that year, in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Starfield stated that, annually, FDA-approved medicines kill 106,000 Americans. That’s over a million Americans per decade. So relying on the FDA to decide whether HCQ is a useful drug is not a concession some Americans are willing to make.
Pharma and all its allies and minions and whores are focusing on a jackpot bonanza for COVID treatment: vaccines and new antiviral drugs. Pharma does not want competition. It definitely does not want to see a landscape in which all sorts of alternative treatments for COVID (or any purported disease) are rampant and free-wheeling.
We are seeing multiple censorship actions across platforms, when people, including doctors, speak positively about HCQ.
Fauci is very much in the pro-Pharma camp, of course. He and Gates want an RNA vaccine to come to market, by any means necessary. They also want antiviral drugs to dominate COVID treatment.
A very sharp reader spelled out the Pharma-anticipated future for these new (toxic) antiviral medicines. And not just for COVID. Up to now, there has been very little mainstream progress in getting drugs specifically designed to treat viruses into the marketplace. This is Pharma’s big opportunity. They envision a trillion-dollar operation that will elevate antivirals (for treating any viruses) to the level of, say, antibiotics, which are used against bacteria. COVID would simply be the first major “breakthrough.”
So we have a war going on. HCQ and other alternative modalities vs. vaccines and antivirals. Pharma does not want to lose this one. It would be disastrous.
I am not touting HCQ. I am putting it this way: if many people are convinced, or become convinced, that HCQ is a drug of choice, and if they believe it is helping them, then a major rebellion against Pharma and the FDA and its counterparts around the world takes off. It soars. And it spurs the use of other alternatives on which Pharma makes zero profits.
So-called natural health and alternative medicine have been booming since the 1980s. A new escalation would send very serious shock waves through the pharmaceutical industry.
Fauci is well aware of this. He is fronting for the industry in every possible way. Trump, with his statements favoring HCQ, has become a major threat in that regard.
When you see new reports of soaring COVID case numbers—a con which I’ve documented six ways from Sunday—you’re not only witnessing a planned strategy to maintain the war against the economy and therefore against billions of people whose lives are at stake; you’re also watching a justification for pushing antivirals and vaccines. For the benefit of Pharma.
The last thing the pharmaceutical industry wants to see is their own case-number con giving birth to wildcat outbreaks of health freedom. People leaving the nest. People going elsewhere for treatment.
Individuals making decisions about their own treatments—this is very serious business. People should look deeply before making choices. In the case of various HCQ protocols, they should consider: dosage levels; when in the course of illness the drug would be given (early or late); whether there is illness requiring treatment to begin with; whether people may have a heredity condition which could make HCQ perilous or even lethal—these are some of the relevant considerations.
The FDA and Pharma want to be the first and last word.
Life and Liberty say they are not the first and last word.
In that regard, there is another issue: licenses vs. contracts. The medical cartel, backed by governments, has established medical boards which grant licenses to practice medicine. These special persons, doctors, are handed the right to treat and cure diseases. This is an attempt to create a monopoly.
There is another avenue: private contracts. Here is the analogy I’ve used to describe this situation. Two adults, Joe and Fred, enter into an agreement. Joe says he has a health condition. He will be the patient. Fred will be the practitioner. Fred has a well on his property. Fred believes the water has a special healing quality. He will give some of it (or sell it) to Joe, who will drink it over the course of two weeks.
Both men, in their contract, agree that no legal liability will be attached to the outcome. They are both responsible. They are of sound mind. They don’t require government permission to sign or fulfill their contract.
That’s it in a nutshell.
Joe and Fred are operating on their own. They have that natural right. They also have the right to be wrong—in case the water treatment doesn’t work, or is harmful.
Of course, all sorts of meddlers will claim this arrangement is illegal and absurd. Meddlers always try to curb freedom. That’s their crusade in life. They can’t stand the idea of people making their own choices and decisions and then accepting the consequences.
I’m not saying governments will honor such contracts. Governments are prime meddlers. I’m saying these contracts (and not just in the arena of healing) stand outside governments. They are citizen-to-citizen. They are prior to government. They are intrinsically more real than government.
CENSORSHIP: CDC Takes Over Frontline Doctors’ Website and Replaces Content with Their Own Data
After the Frontline Doctors website was removed, someone bought the domain name with a .org ending and redirected it to the CDC website on COVID-19. This screenshot shows what appears when you type americasfrontlinedoctors.org into your browser.
by Brian Shilhavy Editor, Health Impact News
As we have been reporting this week, a group of doctors who have been on the front lines treating COVID patients, successfully, descended upon Washington D.C. this week to conduct press conferences and a 2-day “White Coat Summit” to share their experiences in treating, and curing, their COVID patients.
They claim that they represent “thousands” of doctors who have been censored.
Their first press conference was sparsely attended by the Washington D.C. media, and the only media company that filmed it and shared it online, Breitbart News, was immediately censored, and the video was quickly deleted from Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.
But the video of that press conference has been preserved, and has now been viewed by over 20 million people, and our own copy that we have published on our Bitchute Channel has been viewed over 125,000 times so far.
The Frontline Doctor’s Website was removed from the Internet. This was the page advertising their White Coat Summit in Washington D.C. earlier this week. It has been replaced with the CDC Website page on the Coronavirus.
The next day, the Frontline Doctors’ website, which used to be at https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com, was removed by the company that was hosting it.
WOW: Our website host @Squarespace has just completely and arbitrarily shut down our website, claiming a violation of their terms of service.
We are a group of physicians advocating for a better understanding of COVID-19 and its available treatment options.
Two days ago, the same day as the first press conference, someone bought the domain americasfrontlinedoctors.org, which now displays the CDC’s official website about COVID-19. (See image at the top of this article.)
Why is this Life-Saving Information being Censored?
The reason why the U.S. Government and their “health” agencies, as well as Big Tech, are censoring this information is very simple: cures to diseases are not profitable.
Millions of Americans are out of work, tens of thousands of small businesses have closed, and the largest transfer of wealth in the history of the United States has occurred during the past few months, allocating close to 2 TRILLION dollars to Big Pharma, most of it for COVID vaccines.
And all of this is a CRIMINAL ACT against the American people, if what these Frontline Doctors say is true, which is that there is a simple cure for COVID, and that “nobody has to die” from it.
When you understand what is truly happening in America and around the world today, then it is very easy to understand why Big Pharma, Big Tech, and the U.S. Government, all of whom will profit from COVID vaccines and interventions, while at the same time putting into place massive surveillance systems to take away our freedoms, would want to silence this group of doctors who simply want to stop their patients from dying due to the COVID fear.
Here is the full Summit from Day 1 which is also hard to find.
Here is the Day 2 Session:
Here is the list of Speakers that was originally published on their website that is now gone:
Dr. Jeffrey Barke
Dr. Jeffrey Barke is a Board Certified primary care physician in private practice for over 25 years. He completed his medical school and family practice residency at the University of California, Irvine. He has served as an Associate Clinical Professor at U.C. Irvine and a board member of the Orange County Medical Association. He is also a reserve deputy and a tactical physician for a local law enforcement SWAT team. Dr. Barke served as an elected school board member for the Los Alamitos Unified School District for 12 years and is the cofounder and current school board Chair of the free public charter school Orange County Classical Academy. Dr. Barke is married to his high school sweetheart and has two adult children.
Dr. Scott Barbour
Dr. Scott Barbour is the founder and owner of Barbour Orthopaedics & Spine with five clinics and a surgery center in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Barbour is fellowship-trained in sports medicine (Palo Alto medical foundation). Dr. Barbour has been a team physician for several professional sports teams including the Oakland Raiders, San Jose Sharks, USA Rugby Teams. He is currently the team physician for the Atlanta franchise of Major League Rugby professional rugby team. Dr. Barbour has appeared on numerous radio and television shows. He has published articles and book chapters on Orthopedic surgery and has been an editor for American Journal of Sports Medicine. He currently co-hosts “The Doctors Lounge” podcast on America’s Web Radio and is a board member of Docs4PatientCare foundation.
Simone Gold, MD, JD, FABEM
Dr. Simone Gold, MD, JD, FABEM, is a board certified emergency physician. She graduated from Chicago Medical School before attending Stanford University Law School to earn her Juris Doctorate degree. She completed her residency in Emergency Medicine at Stony Brook University Hospital in New York. Dr. Gold worked in Washington D.C. for the Surgeon General, as well as for the Chairman of the Labor & Human Resources Committee. She works as an emergency physician on the front-lines whether or not there is a pandemic. Her clinical work serves all Americans: from urban-inner city, to suburban and the Native American population. Her legal work focuses on policy issues relating to law and medicine.
Dr. Teryn Clarke. MD
Dr. Clarke is a board-certified neurologist. Her focus is on the diagnosis and management of Alzheimer’s Disease and other cognitive disorders. Her mission to educate the community and optimize lifestyle for brain health and general health. The Alzheimer’s Foundation of America selected her as their Dementia Care Professional of the Year in 2015. During the pandemic, she has remained focused on the health and psychological needs of seniors. She is now working within her community to identify and treat deficiencies to boost immune system function in this vulnerable population.
Dr. Robert Hamilton
Dr. Robert C. Hamilton, M.D. has been a general pediatrician in Santa Monica, CA for 36 years. He studied medicine at UCLA Medical School and did his pediatric residency and Chief Residency at UCLA Medical Center as well. He is a former President of the Los Angeles Pediatric Society. Dr. Hamilton founded ‘Lighthouse Medical Missions’, a volunteer organization that organizes short-term medical missions to Africa, Asia, Central and South America. He has travelled to Africa on medical teams 26 times and his most recent trip was to Colombia to aid Venezuelan refugees leaving their country.
He is also the creator of the ‘Hamilton Hold’, a technique for calming crying babies that has been seen by over 44 million viewers worldwide on YouTube. In 2018 he authored 7 Secrets of the Newborn. He has written editorial articles for the Wall Street Journal, and appeared as a television guest on Good Morning America, The Doctor Oz Show, Fox’s Morning Show, Beijing’s CCTV show ‘Challenge Impossible’ and on Fox’ The Ingraham Angle. He has also been a guest on the Dennis Prager radio show and Eric Metaxis’ podcast. Finally, he is the host of his own podcast entitled, ‘The Hamilton Review: Where Kids and Culture Collide’.
Dr. Hamilton is the father of 6 children and the grandfather of 9 grandchildren.
Dr. Kristin Held
Dr. Kirstin Held is a board-certified ophthalmologist and ophthalmic surgeon. She is a Phi Beta Kappa Graduate from the University of Texas at Austin and received her medical degree from the University of Texas Medical School at San Antonio, where she was elected to AOA. In 2018, she received the Lifetime Achievement Award from the National Association of Women Business Owners in San Antonio. She served on the healthcare advisory team for Dr. Ben Carson during his presidential campaign and is Co-Chair of the Healthcare Advisory Council for Congressman Chip Roy. Dr. Held has had numerous articles published, including in the Washington Times, Houston Chronicle, The Hill, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and Dr. Carson’s American Currentsee. She has spoken across the country advocating for the patient-physician relationship and she actively shares healthcare policy information with over 48K followers on Twitter.
Dr. Held is married and has four daughters; two are physicians, and two are in business. She is proud to be an 8 year cancer survivor and remains forever grateful to her brilliant physicians and surgeons.
Dr. Mark McDonald
Mental Health Liason
Dr. McDonald trained in both adult and child & adolescent psychiatry at UCLA and achieved double board certification. For the past eight years, he has also trained in adult psychoanalysis. He now specializes in child and adolescent psychiatry. Dr. McDonald has lived and worked in Europe, Asia, and Central America, and he is proficient in Japanese, Spanish, and French. He studied classical music, history, and literature at UC Berkeley. Before beginning his medical education, he taught in public schools. His opinions on the need to re-open America’s schools have been widely published in local and national news, including the Wall Street Journal and The Federalist.
Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo
Dr. Ladapo, MD, PhD, is a physician and health policy researcher whose primary interests include health economics, technology evaluation, and interventions to reduce cardiovascular disease risk. He is Associate Professor-in-Residence at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. His research program is funded by the National Institutes of Health, and his writings have appeared in the Washington Post, USA Today, and the Wall Street Journal. Dr. Ladapo graduated from Wake Forest University and received his MD from Harvard Medical School and his PhD in Health Policy from Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.<
Dr. James Todaro, MD
Dr. James Todaro received his medical degree from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York. He then completed his ophthalmology residency. He continues to lead investigative research in COVID-19 on a global scale. He wrote the first widely read paper on chloroquine in treatment of COVID-19 in An Effective Treatment for Coronavirus (COVID-19), and most recently the first detailed exposé on Surgisphere in A Study Out of Thin Air. His early discovery of the fraudulent data investigation led to what is now referred to as #LancetGate – the stunning once-in-a-generation retraction of the now infamous The Lancet study that had led to the European Union and the WHO halting studies of HCQ.
Dr. Richard Urso
This is MURDER – Crimes Against Humanity
Let’s start calling this what it really is. This is MASS MURDER, with crimes against humanity being committed which should be prosecuted as TREASON.
And things are only going to get worse, if the American public continues to obey everything they are being told to do and just willingly surrender their freedoms and former way of life.
Because the vaccines are coming next, and they are being fast-tracked without proper testing, for a virus which has never even been isolated in a laboratory, and for which no accurate test exists because the 100+ tests currently in the market have all been fast-tracked as well, and are highly inaccurate. See:
(UPDATE: Earlier today – July 29, 2020 – we published this interview between Del Bigtree and Dr. Andrew Kaufman which had been on the Highwire YouTube channel since July 16th, and had well over 100K views. About an hour after we published this article, it disappeared. So here is a copy from our Bitchute channel.)
“Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about—and it’s very difficult for the general public to distinguish. So, make sure the study is coming from a reputable organization that generally gives you the truth—though even with some reputable organizations, you occasionally get an outlier who’s out there talking nonsense. If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”
Right you are, Tony.
So, Tony, here is a very serious statement from a former editor of one of those “places,” the New England Journal of Medicine:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)
And here is another one, from the editor-in-chief of the prestigious journal, The Lancet, founded in 1823:
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
Why stop there? Let’s consult a late public-health expert whose shoes Fauci would have been lucky to shine: Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when Starfield revealed her findings on healthcare in America.
The Starfield review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:
Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people.
On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.
All in all, those parties who could have made effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.
On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.
Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?
A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.
Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?
A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).
Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?
Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?
A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.
Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?
A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!
—end of interview excerpt—
Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the heraldic published studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is completely unreliable, and impenetrable.
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON—ARE SAYING.
If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.
As in: DISASTER.
But please, continue to believe everything Fauci is saying. He must be right about the “pandemic.” After all, he has a very important position, and he’s on television.
So what if his policies have torpedoed the economy and devastated and destroyed lives across the country?
So what if he accepted, without more than a glance, that fraud Neil Ferguson’s computer projection of 500,000 deaths in the UK and two million in the US? In 2005, Ferguson said 200 million people could die from bird flu. The final official tally was a few hundred.
Fauci has an important position, and he’s on television.
Well, I suspect that we all suspected that sooner or later this would happen.
Sooner or later, someone involved in researching the Fauci-Lieber-Wuhan virus, was going to end up yet another victim of those strange “health care deaths” that we have blogged about from time to time. Well, it has happened, according to this article shared by C.S.:
And you can color me really skeptical here. Note the following:
A researcher killed in an apparent murder-suicide was close to “making very significant findings” related to the coronavirus, his department said.
Two shootings that happened over the weekend in Ross Township appear to be a murder-suicide, according to police.
On May 2, police said 37-year-old Bing Liu was found dead in his home on Elm Court from apparent gunshot wounds to his head, neck and torso. Investigators say they now believe his death is a homicide.
Liu was a research assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, his department said on Monday.
“Bing was on the verge of making very significant findings toward understanding the cellular mechanisms that underlie SARS-CoV-2 infection and the cellular basis of the following complications. We will make an effort to complete what he started in an effort to pay homage to his scientific excellence,” the department said on its website. (Emphasis added)
So we have: (1) a Chinese-American, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Pittsburg, who is (2) researching corona viruses and particularly (2a) the mechanisms of how they infect people and (2B) the cellular structures or bases of the complications following. Or to put that country simple, Professor Bing Liu’s research might have cracked the mystery as to why some people become horribly ill, and why some remain asymptomatic, or at best, suffer a cold.
Ahhh… but you can relax, because his apparent murderer was found in a car, the victim of an apparent suicide:
A second man was also found dead in his car on Charlemagne Circle, near Elm Court. Police say it appears he died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.
According to police, the two victims knew each other. Investigators say they believe the male found in his car shot and killed the man in the Elm Court home before coming back to his car and taking his own life.
There you go, Professor Bing Liu and the other man knew each other. It must have been all a friends’ squabble gone horribly wrong. Nothing to see here, move along. But we can relax because Professor Liu’s research will be continued:
“Bing was on the verge of making very significant findings toward understanding the cellular mechanisms that underlie SARS-CoV-2 infection and the cellular basis of the following complications. We will make an effort to complete what he started in an effort to pay homage to his scientific excellence,” the department said on its website. (Emphasis added)
Who wants to lay odds that we’ll never hear any more about Liu’s research?
Of course, there’s not a shred of data, or information, that can support my hypothesis that the unfortunate Professor Liu’s murder was anything more than a friends’ dispute gone wrong. But since virtually everything else about the Fauci-Lieber-Wuhan virus story stinks, not the least malodorous thing about it being the connections between Fauci (rhymes with Grouchy) and Billious Hates, I feel entirely justified in indulging in some high octane speculation. So yes, I would not be honest if I did not admit that my suspicion meter is in the red zone on this one. Somebody wanted this virus out and circulating, and somebody certainly is driving the propatainment media hysteria about the story, and somebody is willing to trash the global economy, and that means that whatever the motivations behind their actions, those motivations are important enough to trash the global economy and to take the risks associated with that action.
And that means in turn that they would do almost anything to anyone threatening whatever their agenda is, like, murdering a medical college professor investigating their virus… why, he might uncover evidence of its bio-engineered nature, and “whodunnit”, or might discover a very simple cure that doesn’t need big pharma. And would “they” make his murder look entirely innocent, like a quarrel between friends gone wrong? Yes. Would “they” plan it so that friend’s gun was used? Yes. Would “they” then turn that friend’s gun on that friend himself, and carefully place the gun in his hand to make it look like suicide (think Vince Foster here)? Yes. Indeed, might these two murders have occurred somewhere else, and the crime scenes staged? Yes. Would “they” be capable of that? Yes.
In this explosive interview, Spiro Skouras is joined by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny. The two discuss the latest developments regarding the coronavirus situation which was declared a global health pandemic by the Gates-funded World Health Organization, as more information comes to light questioning the need for a global lockdown.
Dr. Tenpenny and Spiro examine and explore the motives of the global response by governments, global institutions and private interests, as Dr. Tenpenny exposes perhaps the most alarming aspect of the crisis yet!
No, it is not the virus, it is the blank check issued to the vaccine and drug manufacturers, which not only provides unlimited funding, but also provides blanket immunity to Big Pharma for any harm attributed with the treatments produced during the declared emergency, including all drugs and vaccines.
This blanket immunity is provided by the US government under the PREP Act and provides the drug and vaccine manufacturers the ‘Ultimate Blank Check’ during a declared emergency. As Dr. Tenpenny points out, the vaccine and drug manufacturers have zero incentive to produce a safe product, as the declared emergency not only rolls back regulatory standards and removes them from any and all liability, but it also ensures the government will purchase their products.
This is an unprecedented level of immunity which raises many questions and safety concerns.
The Facts:Professor Didier Raoult has published his early results for Hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for moderate to severe COVID-19 patients. 973 patients out of 1063, according to him, have shown “a good clinical outcome.”
Reflect On:Why is there always so much controversy and politicization of science and treatments? Why are these treatments controversial within the mainstream, but vaccines cannot even be questioned?
In a new study performed at IHU Méditerranée Infection, Marseille, France a cohort of 1061 COVID-19 patients were treated for 3 days with the Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin (HCQ-AZ) combination. A follow-up of at least 9 days was investigated and the study found that no cardiac toxicity was observed. According to the abstract which was recently released:
“A good clinical outcome and virological cure was obtained in 973 (out of 1061) patients within 10 days (91.7%)…A poor outcome was observed for 46 patients (4.3 %); 10 were transferred to intensive care units, 5 patients died (0.47%) (74-95 years old) and 31 required 10 days of hospitalization or more…The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, is a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagiosity in most cases.”
It’s not clear when the complete study will be made available. But there is another side to this story, Sciencemg points out that:
The popular faith in hydroxychloroquine stands in stark contrast to the weakness of the data. Several studies of its efficacy against COVID-19 have delivered an equivocal or negative verdict, and it can have significant side effects, including heart arrhythmias. Raoult’s positive studies have been widely criticized for their limitations and methodological issues. The first included only 42 patients, and Raoult chose who received the drug or a placebo, a no-no in clinical research; the International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy has distanced itself from the paper, published in the society’s International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents. The second study, published as a preprint without peer review, didn’t have a control group at all.
They go on to mention that:
Raoult has dismissed the criticism and complained about the “dictatorship of the methodologists” who insist on randomization and control groups in clinical trials. In his hospital, every patient diagnosed with COVID-19 receives hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin, an antibiotic. Raoult claims this has resulted in a very low death rate, which he says he will document soon in a publication.
Raoult has also found some high-level support in the medical world. An online petition in support of hydroxychloroquine was started by cardiologist and former Minister of Health Philippe Douste-Blazy—France’s candidate to lead the World Health Organization in 2017—and Christian Perronne, head of infectious diseases at the renowned Raymond Poincaré University Hospital in Garches, near Paris. Ten other prominent figures from the medical community, including two members of the Academy of Medicine, have also co-signed the petition, which demands hydroxychloroquine be authorized in hospital settings.
This has become a highly controversial topic that’s been politicized, as with most other medications and drugs. Profit and corporate interests are at stake, and therefore mass perceptions of it are controlled using various tactics and media. Sometimes it can be hard to decipher truth.
These findings also correlate with others that have been gaining attention as well.
For example, Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, a board-certified family practitioner in New York, said in a video interview that a cocktail of Hydroxychloroquine, Zinc Sulfate and Azithromycin are showing phenomenon results with 900 coronavirus patients treated. (source)
In that video he stated that he believes it’s very important to “get this information out to the American people and to the world.”
Dr. Anthony Cardillo, an ER specialist and the CEO of Mend Urgent Care, has been prescribing the zinc and hydroxychloroquine combination on patients experiencing severe symptoms associated with COVID-19. In an interview with KABC-TV, Cardillo stated:
“Every patient I’ve prescribed it to has been very, very ill and within 8 to 12 hours, they were basically symptom-free, […] So, clinically I am seeing a resolution.”
“We have to be cautious and mindful that we don’t prescribe it for patients who have COVID who are well,” he said. “It should be reserved for people who are really sick, in the hospital or at home very sick, who need that medication. Otherwise we’re going to blow through our supply for patients that take it regularly for other disease processes.”
According to Cardillo, it’s the combination of zinc and hydroxychloroquine that does the job. “[Hydrocychloroquine] opens the zinc channel” allowing the zinc to enter the cell, which then “blocks the replication of cellular machinery.”
President Donald Trump has also been quite outspoken about this treatment in some of his recent press conferences. We’ve seen many mainstream media publications, however, downplay the potential of this treatment which may be confusing people.
Cardillo added that the drug should only be prescribed to patients who are on the more severe side when it comes to symptoms. This will help keep the limited supply of the drug ready for those who truly need it.
In New Jersey, Physicians have called for more autonomy in treatment of COVID-19
“An additional group of doctors has contacted a New Jersey State Senator calling on the State to lift restrictions on the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for the therapeutic treatment and prophylactic early treatment of COVID-19. The doctors are echoing Senator Pennacchio’s appeal for New Jersey to accumulate a stockpile of the medication….Pennacchio also wants the State to immediately compile a priority list for the HCQ distribution, ensuring enough medication for those currently prescribed for maladies including Lupus and RA, distribution to patients who have developed COVID-19, and for citizens as a preventive treatment. ‘I am optimistic these measures would decrease the severity and duration of the disease,’ said Pennacchio. ‘The goal must be breaking the pandemic so people can be allowed to return to their normal lives.’ ‘Allow doctors to be doctors. Remove the State’s unnecessary shackles, and let them save lives,’ Pennacchio urged.” (source)
In France, a large study indicates combination of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin to be effective in treating COVID-19
“In 80 in-patients receiving a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, the team found a clinical improvement in all but one 86 year-old patient who died, and one 74-year old patient still in intensive care unit. The team also found that, by administering hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin, they were able to observe an improvement in all cases, except in one patient who arrived with an advanced form…The team went on to say: ‘Thus, in addition to its direct therapeutic role, this association can play a role in controlling the disease epidemic by limiting the duration of virus shedding, which can last for several weeks in the absence of specific treatment.’” (source)
All of this, of course, continues to raise the question: why is there such a strong push for a vaccine, and perhaps a mandated one, when there are other options available now? Why is the world listening to Bill Gates and his calls for further lockdown until the vaccine is ready? Is there something else going on here? Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed that things won’t go back to ‘normal’ until a COVID-19 vaccine is developed.” You can read more about that here.
High-dose intravenous VC has also been successfully used in the treatment of 50 moderate to severe COVID-19 patients in China. The doses used varied between 2 g and 10 g per day, given over a period of 8–10 h. Additional VC bolus may be required among patients in critical conditions. The oxygenation index was improving in real time and all the patients eventually cured and were discharged. In fact, high-dose VC has been clinically used for several decades and a recent NIH expert panel document states clearly that this regimen (1.5 g/kg body weight) is safe and without major adverse events.
Again, all of this information should really raise some red flags and questions about what’s going on within governments, and their connection to pharmaceutical companies. They’re the largest lobbying entity in Washington D.C. They have more lobbyists in Washington D.C. than there are congressman and senators combined. They give twice to Congress what the next largest lobbying entity is, which is oil and gas… Imagine the power they exercise over both republicans and democrats. You can read more about that here.
Why do we continue to turn to and rely on federal health regulatory agencies and companies that don’t make health a priority, and put profits ahead of health?