MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Pfizer’

Fully Vaccinated Individuals Are Testing Positive For The Coronavirus: More Examples Emerge – Collective Evolution

Posted by M. C. on May 14, 2021

If this vaccine was completely safe and effective, travel mandates, for example wouldn’t be needed, everybody would be rushing to get one. Do we really want to give governments the power to implement health mandates when it goes against the will of so many people, doctors, and scientists?

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2021/05/12/fully-vaccinated-individuals-are-testing-positive-for-the-coronavirus-more-examples-emerge/

ByArjun Walia

In Brief

  • The Facts:Multiple reports around the globe are showing that fully vaccinated individuals are still testing positive for COVID.
  • Reflect On:How safe and effective are the vaccines?
Coherent icon

Before you begin…

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: News of fully vaccinated individuals testing positive for COVID seem to be making headlines everywhere. For example, six people who tested positive in a Sydney hotel quarantine had already been fully vaccinated. According to data from NSW Health’s weekly COVID-19 surveillance report, between April 10 and May 1, six people in quarantine who reported being fully vaccinated were among the 150 overseas cases recorded. One had received a one-shot vaccine, such as Johnson & Johnson, and the remaining cases had received both doses of a two-shot vaccine, such as Pfizer, AstraZeneca or Moderna. University of Sydney epidemiologist Dr. Fiona Stanaway said, given no COVID-19 vaccine is 100 percent effective, it was to be expected that some people who have been vaccinated test positive. advertisement – learn more

The New York Yankees recently announced that they had two coaches and one support staff member test positive for COVID despite all of them being fully vaccinated. In Seychelles, East Africa, the World Health Organization (WHO) said that on Tuesday it was reviewing coronavirus data in the region after the health ministry said more than a third of people who tested positive for COVID-19 in the past week had been fully vaccinated.

–> Become A CE Member: The only thing that keeps our journalism going is YOU. CE members get access to exclusive benefits and support our shared mission.. Click here to learn more!

These are a few of many examples, but it shouldn’t come as a surprise as people have been warned throughout the pandemic that the full dosage of COVID vaccines will not be 100 percent effective. Canada’s Chief Public Health officer Teresa Tam, for example, recently reminded Canadians on Saturday that even those who are fully vaccinated are susceptible to COVID. She did say, however, that the risk of asymptomatic transmission is far lower for anyone who is fully vaccinated, but how much lower? What about asymptomatic individuals who are not vaccinated?

According to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford University’s School of Medicine,

The scientific evidence now strongly suggests that COVID-19 infected individuals who are asymptomatic are more than an order of magnitude less likely to spread the disease to even close contacts than symptomatic COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis of 54 studies from around the world found that within households – where none of the safeguards that restaurants are required to apply are typically applied – symptomatic patients passed on the disease to household members in 18 percent of instances, while asymptomatic patients passed on the disease to household members in 0.7 per cent of instances. A separate, smaller meta-analysis similarly found that asymptomatic patients are much less likely to infect others than symptomatic patients.

Asymptomatic individuals are an order of magnitude less likely to infect others than symptomatic individuals, even in intimate settings such as people living in the same household where people are much less likely to follow social distancing and masking practices that they follow outside the household. Spread of the disease in less intimate settings by asymptomatic individuals – including religious services, in-person restaurant visits, gyms, and other public settings – are likely to be even less likely than in the household. (source)

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The COVID Vaccine Is a Product of Systemic Racism

Posted by M. C. on May 10, 2021

https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/blog/the-covid-vaccine-is-a-product-of-systemic-racism/

By Walter Block

(This op-ed is written by a politically correct analyst, who will remain anonymous, but brought to you by Walter E. Block.)

I cannot in good conscience take the COVID vaccine. Why not? Because its producers are mainly toxic white males. 

We wokesters want a COVID vaccine created in a more inclusive manner. Yes, yes, we will include a few token toxic white male supremacists, evil though they be, but we want laboratories that “Look Like America.” That means proportional representation by blacks, Hispanics, women, the transgendered, the queer, the bisexuals, the handicapped (both mentally and physically), young people, old people, people of color, Indigenous Americans, Asian Americans, and the vertically challenged.

But the COVID vaccines have not been created in anything approaching an inclusive manner. Unless and until this occurs, we pledge not to avail ourselves of these vaccines.

Why is this important? We the downtrodden will not feel safe until and unless the laboratories of the nation are emptied of most (not all—we are moderates, not radicals) cisgender white males. They are exploitive wherever they go; they have colonized; they have enslaved; they have exploited workers. These capitalists have ruined the economy and the environment.

The reason minorities are not proportionately represented among chemists, biologists, epidemiologists, and medical scientists is that they have all too few role models to emulate. Given our boycott, this will soon change. On that happy day, future consumers will not have to be bitterly disappointed that these occupations are non-inclusive.

Here are the details. After a pause in the distribution of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, there are two COVID vaccines currently making the rounds. They are produced by Pfizer and Moderna, respectively. Who are the people associated with the creation of these COVID vaccines?

Pfizer lists the following individuals as being involved with vaccines: Nanette Cocero, William C. Gruber, Kathrin U. Jansen, Luis Jodar, and Nicholas Kitchin. Pfizer’s immunologists are Jean Beebe, Jeremy D. Gale, and Thomas A. Wynn. Those who study and cure rare diseases include Seng H. Cheng, Katherine L. Beaverson, Michael Binks, Christian Czech, Sarah Grimwood, Greg Larosa, John Murphy, and Clark Pan. Pfizer’s medical experts are Aida Habtezion and Mace L. Rothenberg. The team studying cardiovascular and metabolic diseases is comprised of Kendra K. Bence, Morris J. Birnbaum, Albert Kim, and Bei B. Zhang.

Of these people, only Habtezion, who is from Eritrea, is African-American.

Over at Moderna the executive committee consists of Stéphane Bancel, Stephen Hoge, Juan Andres, Marcello Damiani, Tracey Franklin, Lori Henderson, Ray Jordan, Corinne Le Goff, David Meline, and Tal Zaks. Moderna’s board members are listed as follows: Noubar Afeyan, Stéphane Bancel, Stephen Berenson, Sandra Horning, Robert Langer, Elizabeth Nabel, François Nader, Paul Sagan, Elizabeth Tallett, and Henri A. Termeer. Those on the scientific advisory board include Jack Szostak, Ulrich H. von Andrian, Michael Diamond, Ron Eydelloth, Rachel Green, Paula T. Hammond, Robert Langer, Sander G. Mills, Melissa Moore, and Ralph Weissleder.

An examination of their pictures reveals that only one of them, Hammond, is black. If this is not clear evidence of racism, then nothing is.

Blacks and African Americans comprise roughly 13 percent of the population of the United States. If their representation were even 10 percent of the people involved in creating COVID-19 vaccines, I would be satisfied. Exact representation is not required. After all, the National Football League and the National Basketball Association could never be considered racist, and their black representation greatly exceeds 13 percent. But this atrocious level of underrepresentation for black Americans in the COVID vaccine initiative cries out to the heavens for social justice.

“Equity” has not been even approximately achieved. 

So, our conscience dictates that we boycott Moderna and Pfizer’s products until and unless they engage in sufficient amount of skin color diversity and inclusiveness.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Straight From the Horse’s Mouth: The Vaccines Are Ineffective – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on April 20, 2021

In fact, it now appears that the very vaccines that were supposed to protect you from Covid may make you more vulnerable to it. This is from another study conducted in Israel, one of the world’s most vaccinated nations:

“Israeli researchers found people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine were eight times more likely to be infected with the South African variant, and people who received one dose of the vaccine were more likely to get the UK variant.”

It is time to rise up against this gargantuan healthcare fraud and hold the perpetrators and their accomplices responsible.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/04/vasko-kohlmayer/straight-from-the-horses-mouth-the-vaccines-are-ineffective/

By Vasko Kohlmayer

“Pfizer CEO says third Covid vaccine dose likely needed within 12 months,” reads a recent CNBC headline. “Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said people will ‘likely’ need a third dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated,” we are told.

“Moderna hopes to have Covid booster shot for its vaccine ready by the fall, CEO says,” announces another CNBC report. “Moderna hopes to have a Covid booster shot available for Americans by the fall, according to CEO Stephane Bancel,” the article reassures concerned readers.

The hidden lead in these reports is that one of history’s greatest frauds is being perpetrated right before our eyes. This should be obvious to anyone capable of making a logical deduction.

The inescapable implication of these reports is that the vaccines being currently administered will not give you sufficient protection against Covid-19 going forward. In other words, these injections are ineffective.

If these vaccines were effective, the CEOs of these companies would not speak about the necessity of receiving another shot in a few months’ time.

Let us spell it out again: come this fall, the vaccine that you have taken or are about to take will not protect you from Covid.

Why, then, are governments still going ahead with these massive vaccination programs that inject ineffective pharmaceuticals into the arms of millions every day?

For not only are these hastily cooked up concoctions ineffective, they are outright dangerous. Thousands of people have been needlessly killed by them and hundreds of thousands have suffered serious injuries.

“10,000+ deaths after COVID shots reported by U.S., European agencies,” we read in a report that compiled data collected by various government bodies. “More than 7,000 deaths have occurred in Europe, and more than 200,000 injuries worldwide have been reported,” we learn.

The question is this: why are these vaccination programs – which are causing widespread death and injury – and which are ineffective vis-à-vis their stated purpose, i.e., protecting against Covid, allowed to continue?

This is nothing less than a crime against humanity, which is being carried out by pharma companies and their enablers in government and the scientific community with the help of the media shills.

Real scientists have always known that due to the mutating nature of the virus, it will not be possible to come up with an effective vaccine against Covid-19. This, however, did not stop pharma executives and their scientific sidekicks from cooking up ineffective and dangerous concoctions and then injecting them into the bodies of hundreds of millions of human beings.

Why would they do this? Because of money, of course. The value of Moderna’s CEO shares, for example, has now shot up to about five billion dollars. Not a bad payoff for other peoples’ pain.

Tellingly, the CEO, Stephane Bancel, has refused to reveal his own vaccination status.

But the fraud runs even deeper. Not only will the presently offered vaccines be ineffective against variants that will emerge in the fall, but they are already ineffective against some of the variants in circulation right now.

Just consider this headline from CNBC: “Covid variant from South Africa was able to ‘break through’ Pfizer vaccine in Israeli study.” The piece’s opening sentence informs us that “[t]he coronavirus variant first discovered in South Africa is able to evade some of the protection of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.” This should make everyone pause, since the South African variant is a widespread mutation that has been detected in dozens of countries around the world and has already become the dominant strain in some of them.

In fact, it now appears that the very vaccines that were supposed to protect you from Covid may make you more vulnerable to it. This is from another study conducted in Israel, one of the world’s most vaccinated nations:

“Israeli researchers found people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine were eight times more likely to be infected with the South African variant, and people who received one dose of the vaccine were more likely to get the UK variant.”

It is time to rise up against this gargantuan healthcare fraud and hold the perpetrators and their accomplices responsible.

Vasko Kohlmayer [email] was born and grew up in former communist Czechoslovakia. He is the author of The West in Crisis: Civilizations and Their Death Drives.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Pfizer CEO says third Covid vaccine dose likely needed within 12 months

Posted by M. C. on April 17, 2021

$$$urprised?

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/pfizer-ceo-says-third-covid-vaccine-dose-likely-needed-within-12-months.html

Key Points

  • Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said people will “likely” need a third dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated.
  • He also said it’s possible people will need to get vaccinated against the coronavirus annually.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Pfizer Bullies Nations To Put Up Collateral for Lawsuits – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on March 9, 2021

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/08/pfizer-covid-vaccine.aspx

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

Story at-a-glance

  • Pfizer is demanding countries put up sovereign assets, including bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings, as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits resulting from its COVID-19 inoculation
  • Argentina and Brazil have rejected Pfizer’s demands. According to legal experts, Pfizer is abusing its power
  • In the U.S., vaccine makers already enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from the COVID-19 vaccine under the PREP Act. If you’re injured, you’d have to file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which is funded by U.S. taxpayers
  • A significant problem with the CICP is that it’s administered within the Department of Health and Human Services, which is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program. This conflict of interest makes the CICP less likely to admit fault with the vaccine
  • The maximum CICP payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person, and you first have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP kicks in

As reported by New Delhi-based World Is One News (WION),1 Pfizer is demanding countries put up sovereign assets as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits resulting from its COVID-19 inoculation. In other words, it wants governments to guarantee the company will be compensated for any expenses resulting from injury lawsuits against it.

WION reports that Argentina and Brazil have rejected Pfizer’s demands. Initially, the company demanded indemnification legislation to be enacted, such as that which it enjoys in the U.S. Argentina proposed legislation that would restrict Pfizer’s financial responsibility for injuries to those resulting from negligence or malice.

Pfizer rejected the proposal. It also rejected a rewritten proposal that included a clearer definition of negligence. Pfizer then demanded the Argentinian government put up sovereign assets — including its bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings — as collateral. Argentina refused. A similar situation occurred in Brazil. Pfizer demanded Brazil:

  1. “Waive sovereignty of its assets abroad in favor of Pfizer”
  2. Not apply its domestic laws to the company
  3. Not penalize Pfizer for vaccine delivery delays
  4. Exempt Pfizer from all civil liability for side effects

Brazil rejected Pfizer’s demands, calling them “abusive.” As noted by WION, Pfizer developed its vaccine with the help of government funding, and now it — a private company — is demanding governments hand over sovereign assets to ensure the company won’t lose a dime if its product injures people, even if those injuries are the result of negligent company practices, fraud or malice.

Some liability protection is warranted, but certainly not for fraud, gross negligence, mismanagement, failure to follow good manufacturing practices. Companies have no right to ask for indemnity for these things. ~ Lawrence Gostlin, Law Professor

Aside from Argentina and Brazil, nine other South American countries have reportedly negotiated deals with Pfizer. It’s unclear whether they actually ended up giving up national assets in return.2

Vaccine Maker Accused of Abusing Its Power

According to STAT News,3 “Legal experts have raised concerns that Pfizer’s demands amount to an abuse of power.” Lawrence Gostin, law professor at Georgetown University and director of the World Health Organization’s Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law told STAT:4

“Pharmaceutical companies shouldn’t be using their power to limit lifesaving vaccines in low- and middle-income countries. [This] seems to be exactly what they’re doing … Some liability protection is warranted, but certainly not for fraud, gross negligence, mismanagement, failure to follow good manufacturing practices. Companies have no right to ask for indemnity for these things.”

Mark Eccleston-Turner, a lecturer in global health law at Keele University in England, added:5

“[Pfizer] is trying to eke out as much profit and minimize its risk at every juncture with this vaccine development then this vaccine rollout. Now, the vaccine development has been heavily subsidized already. So there’s very minimal risk for the manufacturer involved there.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Governments Sign Secret Vaccine Deals. Here’s What They Hide.

Posted by M. C. on February 2, 2021

NYT!!!


Deadly storm continues to dump snow on Northeast Myanmar coup: Anger and anxiety after military seizes power and detains Aung… Governments Sign Secret Vaccine Deals. Here’s What They Hide.

BRUSSELS — When members of the European Parliament sat down this month to read the first publicly available contract for purchasing coronavirus vaccines, they noticed something missing. Actually, a lot missing.A health care worker administering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine at a nursing home in Reims, France, earlier this month. © Andrea Mantovani for The New York Times A health care worker administering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine at a nursing home in Reims, France, earlier this month.

The price per dose? Redacted. The rollout schedule? Redacted. The amount of money being paid up front? Redacted.

And that contract, between the German pharmaceutical company CureVac and the European Union, is considered one of the world’s most transparent.

Governments have poured billions of dollars into helping drug companies develop vaccines and are spending billions more to buy doses. But the details of those deals largely remain secret, with governments and public health organizations acquiescing to drug company demands for secrecy.a group of people standing in front of a crowd: Waiting in line to receive Moderna’s vaccine in San Diego. The company said its vaccination program was fully funded by the federal government. © Ariana Drehsler for The New York Times Waiting in line to receive Moderna’s vaccine in San Diego. The company said its vaccination program was fully funded by the federal government.

Just weeks into the vaccination campaign, that secrecy is already making accountability difficult. The drug companies Pfizer and AstraZeneca recently announced that they would miss their European delivery targets, causing widespread concern as dangerous virus variants spread. But the terms of their contracts remain closely guarded secrets, making it difficult to question company or government officials about either blame or recourse. https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=3533

Available documents, however, suggest that drug companies demanded and received flexible delivery schedules, patent protection and immunity from liability if anything goes wrong. In some instances, countries are prohibited from donating or reselling doses, a ban that could hamper efforts to get vaccines to poor countries.

Governments are cutting at least three types of vaccine deals: Some are buying directly from pharmaceutical companies. Others are buying through regional bodies like the European Union or the African Union. Many will turn to the nonprofit Covax program, an alliance of more than 190 countries, which is buying from the drug makers with an eye toward making vaccines available worldwide, especially to poor countries free or at reduced cost. Some governments have signed deals with manufacturers and Covax alike.Administering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in France earlier this month. The European Union is paying much less than the United States for each dose of the shot. © Andrea Mantovani for The New York Times Administering the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in France earlier this month. The European Union is paying much less than the United States for each dose of the shot.

The United States has secured 400 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, enough for 200 million people, and is close to arranging 200 million additional doses by summer, with options to buy up to 500 million more. It also has advance purchase agreements for more than 1 billion doses from four other companies whose inoculations do not yet have U.S. regulatory approval.

The European Commission, the European Union’s executive branch negotiating on behalf of its 27 member states, has nearly 2.3 billion doses under contract and is negotiating for about 300 million more, according to data collected by UNICEF and Airfinity, a science analytics company.

Covax says it has agreements for just over 2 billion vaccine doses although it, too, is keeping its contracts secret. Only about a dozen of the 92 countries that qualify for vaccine subsidies under the alliance have managed to secure separate deals with individual companies, for a combined 500 million doses.

Despite the secrecy, government and regulatory documents, public statements, interviews and the occasional slip-up have revealed some key details about the vaccine deals. Here is what we learned.

Governments Helped Create Vaccines

Vaccine development is a risky venture. Companies rarely invest in manufacturing until they’re sure their vaccines are effective and can win government approval. That’s part of why it typically takes so long to develop and roll them out.

To speed up that process, governments — primarily the United States and Europe — and nonprofit groups like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, or CEPI, absorbed some or all of that risk.a group of people in a room: Packing boxes of Covishield, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, at an assembly line in Pune, India. © Atul Loke for The New York Times Packing boxes of Covishield, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, at an assembly line in Pune, India.

The United States, for example, committed up to $1.6 billion to help the Maryland-based company Novavax develop its coronavirus vaccine, according to regulatory filings. CEPI kicked in up to about $400 million in grants and no-interest loans.

Other companies have received even more help. The Massachusetts biotech company Moderna not only used government-developed technology as the foundation of its vaccine, it also received about $1 billion in government grants to develop the drug. In August, the government then placed an initial order for the vaccine for $1.5 billion. The company has said that the project was paid for entirely by the federal government.

These types of arrangements were designed to help companies jump-start manufacturing and cover costs such as clinical testing.

But Companies Keep the Patents

Despite the tremendous taxpayer investments, typically the drug companies fully own the patents. That means that companies can decide how and where the vaccines get manufactured and how much they cost. As the CureVac contract explains it, the company “shall be entitled to exclusively exploit any such” property rights.

This has been a matter of contention for months. A coalition of countries, led by India and South Africa, have petitioned the World Trade Organization to waive intellectual property rights so generic drug makers can begin producing the vaccines. The World Health Organization has endorsed the idea, but it is all but doomed by opposition from the United States and Europe, whose drug makers say patents, and the profits that flow from them, are the lifeblood of innovation.a group of people at a train station: Patients sitting in a waiting area after being vaccinated in Berlin last month. © Lena Mucha for The New York Times Patients sitting in a waiting area after being vaccinated in Berlin last month.

“Governments are creating artificial scarcity,” said Zain Rizvi of the watchdog group Public Citizen. “When the public funds knowledge that is required to end a pandemic, it shouldn’t be kept a secret.”

Prices Will Vary

One of the key terms of the vaccine contracts — the price per dose — is frequently redacted in the public versions of government contracts. The companies consider this a trade secret. Some drug companies have included clauses in their supply contracts that allow them to suspend deliveries if countries reveal the price.

By insisting that their pricing remains confidential, the drug makers have the upper hand over government negotiators who do not know what other countries are paying.

While governments accepted that provision, leaks and some official reports show some of the disparities. The European Commission paid $2.19 for every dose of the vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca, while South Africa paid more than twice as much, $5.25, according to media reports.

Drug companies did not respond to requests to view their unredacted contracts or explain why secrecy was necessary. A spokeswoman for Moderna pointed only to a regulatory document that said the contract “contains terms and conditions that are customary.”

That is why it caused such a stir last month when a Belgian official mistakenly revealed a price list, which showed that United States taxpayers were paying $19.50 per dose for the Pfizer vaccine, while Europeans paid $14.70.

Dag Inge Ulstein, Norway’s minister of international development, said countries and international organizations must do more to make contracts public. He also called on countries to share vaccine technology and said rich governments should donate vaccines to poor countries early — even while still vaccinating their own citizens, as Norway plans to do.

“There must be transparency related to the agreements on procurements,” he said in an interview. To that end, he shared with The New York Times his country’s purchase agreement with Covax. That organization has refused to make public its deals — either with the drug makers or with the countries it is selling to.

Covax contracts with countries assume a cost of $10.55 per dose but warn that the final cost could be higher after including an “access/speed premium,” which Covax said is used to help companies rush their vaccines to market.

Donations and Resales Are Restricted

Public health advocates have called on wealthy countries — which have all but cornered the market on the early doses — to donate or sell vaccines to poor countries. But contracts may restrict buyers’ ability to export doses, which could depress drug company sales.

The CureVac contract, for example, prohibits European countries from reselling, exporting or donating doses — including to Covax — without permission from the company. Some contracts in the United States have similar restrictions.

A spokesman for the European Commission has said the companies included that provision to guarantee that, wherever their drugs were used, they were covered by the same legal protections.

And governments are trying to find other ways to restrict exports.

On Tuesday, Germany lobbied the European Commission to allow its member states to block exports of vaccines to countries outside of the bloc after the stuttering start of vaccine distribution in Europe.

Vaccines Arrive When They Arrive

Delivery times are considered proprietary information, so there are no public benchmarks to measure a company against.

Nowhere is that clearer than in the European Union’s fight with AstraZeneca over the company’s announcement that it would not deliver the expected number of doses in the first quarter of this year. European officials say they received specific, contractual assurances for such deliveries. The company says it promised only to make its best efforts to hit those targets.

European officials, who initially agreed to keep the contract secret, have now asked the company to make it public. Unless that happens, there’s no way to assess who is responsible.

But there is no question that the drug makers have built themselves plenty of wiggle room for such an ambitious, complicated rollout. The CureVac contract says that the delivery dates (which are all redacted) should be considered estimates. “No product or only reduced volumes of the product may be available at the estimated delivery dates,” the contract reads. Similar provisions exist in other contracts.

Nearly every vaccine maker has similarly told investors that they might not hit their targets. “We may not be able to create or scale up manufacturing capacity on a timely basis,” Pfizer warned in a corporate filing last August.

That uncertainty has frustrated health officials. When Pfizer recently told Italy that it was temporarily cutting deliveries by 29 percent, the government said it was considering taking the company to court. That lawsuit, if it materializes, could make public some details of the European Union’s contract with Pfizer, which remains entirely secret.

“At one point they promised more vaccines or faster vaccines,” said Steven Van Gucht, the Belgian government’s top virologist. “And in the end they couldn’t deliver.”

Some Governments Are Profiting

Early in the pandemic, the European Investment Bank, the lending arm of the European Union, provided a $100 million loan to the German company BioNTech, which partnered with Pfizer in producing a vaccine.

In addition to the interest on the loan, the European bank will receive up to $25 million in vaccine profits, according to a redacted version of the contract that BioNTech filed with securities regulators.

The bank said profit-sharing arrangements reflect the risk involved in early financing. Mr. Rizvi, of Public Citizen, argued that it puts governments on the same side as the drug makers and reduces any incentive to make drugs cheap and widely available.

Companies Get Liability Protection

In the United States, drug companies are shielded from nearly all liability if their vaccines don’t work or cause serious side effects. The government covered Covid-19 drug makers under the PREP Act, a 2005 law intended to speed up access to medicine during health emergencies.

That means that people cannot sue the companies, even in cases of negligence or recklessness. The only exceptions are cases of proven, “willful misconduct.”

Drug companies are seeking similar liability waivers in negotiations with other countries. European negotiators have balked at such requests. Covax also insists that countries accept all liability as part of its contracts.

The CureVac-E.U. contract does shield the company from significant liability, but with exceptions. Those exceptions are redacted.

Monika Pronczuk contributed reporting.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Why People Don’t Trust Pfizer’s Covid Vaccine. | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on December 18, 2020

Whoever funds the study comes out on top. Companies commonly use positive results from head-to-head trials to encourage doctors to prescribe their drug rather than a competitor’s. When the authors of a Journal of Psychiatry survey looked at the trials, they found a curious thing: in five trials that were paid for by Eli Lilly, its drug Zyprexa came out looking superior to Risperdal, a drug made by the company Janssen. But when Janssen sponsored its own trials, Risperdal was the winner three out of four times. When it was Pfizer funding the studies, its drug Geodon was best. In fact, this tendency for the sponsor’s drug to come out on top held true for 90 percent of the more than thirty trials in the survey.6

https://mises.org/wire/why-people-dont-trust-pfizers-covid-vaccine

Antony Sammeroff

Why do people believe in conspiracy theories?

Michael Shermer, a famous skeptic, was forced to admit that one of the reasons is that some of them are true. In his research he found that the fact that some conspiracy theories are real feeds people’s suspicion and makes them susceptible to the belief in others that are far less credible. We are increasingly herded into taking a hard line on issues which are nuanced. One example of this is an apparent increase in two camps: some people are entirely against mainstream medicine while others will bend over backwards to mount an extreme defense of the indefensible excesses of Big Pharma.

Drugs save lives. Drugs are dangerous. These should not be controversial statements, nor do they contradict one another. According to the American Medical Association’s own figures, medical care has become the third leading cause of death in the United States,1 yet few would advocate a return to a time before we had modern medical care.2

When the government is buying the drug no matter what and those companies are protected from liability for damages that may be caused by those drugs, it ceases to be surprising that people may question whether what is being offered up to them is safe or not. One of the reasons why people believe in conspiracy theories about Big Pharma is because some of them are true.

Some of Pfizer’s History

A 2004 advert for Zoloft claimed that over 16 million Americans were affected by social anxiety disorder. But here’s the thing: a study conducted by Pfizer (the manufacturer) discovered that participants did a lot better overcoming social anxiety with “exposure therapy,” including counseling with a primary care doctor about their symptoms and homework to learn how to identify and break through social habits and fears, did better than people who took their drug.3

When the Upjohn Company (now Pfizer) developed Minoxidil, a drug that was originally manufactured to lower blood pressure, they found that it could cause hair regrowth in some balding patients. So they simply switched the marketed effect for the so-called side effect, and they had a drug for balding which just so happened to lower blood pressure.4

The ALLHAT Study (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attacks Trial), was intended to compare the effectiveness of four drugs in preventing complications form high blood pressure. It was originally intended to continue for between four and eight years, but part of it was stopped prematurely because those participants assigned to Cardura (manufactured by Pfizer) were developing significantly more cardiovascular complications than those taking a diuretic. At the time the results were published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association), about $800 million worth of Cardura was being sold each year—but the diuretic was proving more effective at preventing high blood pressure complications at a seventh of the cost. Taking advantage of the fact that most doctors weren’t aware of the research, Pfizer hired damage-control consultants. The American College of Cardiology (ACC) issued a press release recommending that doctors “discontinue use” of Cardura but mere hours later downgraded its wording to “reassess.” Could this be something to do with Pfizer contributing more than $500,000 a year to the ACC?5

Whoever funds the study comes out on top. Companies commonly use positive results from head-to-head trials to encourage doctors to prescribe their drug rather than a competitor’s. When the authors of a Journal of Psychiatry survey looked at the trials, they found a curious thing: in five trials that were paid for by Eli Lilly, its drug Zyprexa came out looking superior to Risperdal, a drug made by the company Janssen. But when Janssen sponsored its own trials, Risperdal was the winner three out of four times. When it was Pfizer funding the studies, its drug Geodon was best. In fact, this tendency for the sponsor’s drug to come out on top held true for 90 percent of the more than thirty trials in the survey.6

A 2017 article noted that “prices for U.S. made pharmaceuticals have climbed over the past decade six times as far as the cost of goods and services overall.”7 In a famous case Mylan was able to increase the price of the EpiPen by more than 450 percent, adjusting for inflation, between 2004 and 2016—despite the epinephrine in each injection costing only around $1—because they were the only legal supplier of the product.8 This example, while extreme, is unfortunately not exceptional. Pfizer, Biogen, Gilead Sciences, Amgem, AbbieVie, Turing Pharmaceutical, Envizo, Valeant Pharmaceuticals, and Jazz Pharmaceuticals (to name a few) all seem to have benefited from price gouging by obtaining legally protected monopoly power over certain healthcare products.9

The covid-19 vaccine manufactured by Pfizer—having bypassed the usual 5–10 years of safety testing—may well be completely harmless, but so long as this kind of tomfoolery continues to be common within the medical field we can expect ever more skeptical people to be labeled by their critics as “antivaxx.”

Pfizer set a record for the largest health care fraud settlement and the largest criminal fine of any kind with $2.3 billion in 2009. The online website Corporate Research Project includes a Pfizer Rap Sheet detailing a number of the controversies they have been involved in.

  • 1. Ray Sipherd, “The Third-Leading Cause of Death in US Most Doctors Don’t Want You to Know About,” CNBC, Feb. 22, 2018, http://bit.ly/100_errors.
  • 2. In their famous report, To Err Is Human, the Institute of Medicine estimated that while 98,000 Americans are killed each year by medical errors, between 90,000 and 400,000 patients are harmed or killed by the innocent use of drugs. They either received the wrong drug, the wrong dose of the right drug, or two drugs that interacted in the wrong way. Institute of Medicine, To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System, ed. Linda T. Kohn, Janet M. Corrigan, and Molla S. Donaldson (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000).
  • 3. John Abramson, Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine (New York: Harper Perennial, 2013), p. 232–33.
  • 4. Doug McGuff and Robert P. Murphy, Primal Prescription: Surviving the “Sick Care” Sinkhole (n.p.: Primal Nutrition, 2015), p. 65.
  • 5. Abramson, Overdosed America, p. 108–09.
  • 6. Shannon Brownlee, Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine Is Making Us Sicker and Poorer (New York: Bloomsbury, 2008), p. 230.
  • 7. Robert Pearl, “New Checks and Balances For Big Pharma,” The Health Care Blog, May 12, 2017, http://bit.ly/New_Checks.
  • 8. Charles Silver and David A. Hyman, Overcharged: Why Americans Pay Too Much for Health Care (Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2018), p. 28.
  • 9. Silver and Hyman, Overcharged, pp. 25–30.

Author:

Antony Sammeroff

Antony Sammeroff co-hosts the Scottish Liberty Podcast and has featured prominently on other libertarian themed shows including The Tom Woods Show, Lions of Liberty, School Sucks Podcast, and many more. His book Universal Basic Income — For and Against (with a foreword by Robert P. Murphy) is available in paperback and on Amazon Kindle. His previous self-help book Procrastination Annihilation is free to download from BeYourselfAndLoveIt.com. Antony blogs on economic issues at SeeingNotSeen.Blogspot.com and his articles have also been published by the Scottish Libertarian Party, the Cobden Centre, The Backbencher, The Rational Rise, and ActualAnarchy.com.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

5 Ways Americans Could Be “Encouraged” to Get a Covid Vaccine

Posted by M. C. on December 7, 2020

It’s likely to be a much different approach than a SWAT team breaching your house in the middle of the night, holding down your family members, and stabbing them with syringes. If a widespread push is made to get people to take this vaccine, it will likely be a case of making life difficult for those who opt-out and more pleasant for those who opt-in.

https://www.theorganicprepper.com/covid-vaccine/

by Daisy Luther

As Pfizer and Moderna both rush a vaccine to market to fight the Covid-19 virus, will promises of returning to “normal” be enough to persuade people to take the quickly developed injection?

This article isn’t about persuading you one way or the other about whether you should be vaccinated. That is a matter for you, your family, and your physician to discuss. It’s about the opinions of Americans, the legalities of mandating cooperation, what we know about the vaccine, and the tactics that could be used to “encourage” your cooperation.

It’s expected that the new coronavirus vaccines will be approved any day now. Each vaccine is said to require two shots to confer immunity to the virus. Pfizer requires two doses three weeks apart, and Moderna requires two doses four weeks apart.

About half of Americans are eager to be vaccinated.

According to a poll conducted by Pew Research, 51% of American adults would immediately get a vaccine if it were available. That, of course, means that nearly half of all American adults aren’t convinced this is something that they want to do right now. This number has decreased from the first time the poll was taken. Back in May, 72% of American adults were on board with rolling up their sleeves as soon as possible.

Of course, this poll assumes that people will have a choice whether or not to be inoculated.

While half of the people surveyed want the injection, the other half do not. And that’s where the controversy lies – should we have a choice what medical treatments we undergo? Dr. Ron Paul spoke to The Huffington Post back in 2008 and said something as meaningful today as it was a dozen years ago.

“If we accept this notion that the federal government is going to dictate what we can put into our bodies, then it leads to the next step: that the government is going to regulate everything that is supposedly good for us. That’s where they are. They have an FDA that won’t allow somebody who’s dying to use an experimental drug which might speed up the process of finding out which drugs are good and which drugs are bad and the federal government comes in and dictates that they want complete control over vitamins and nutritional products and I just think the whole principal of government telling us what we can take in or not take in is just a dangerous position to take… it’s related to the drug industry because they’d like to control all of this.” (source)

Here are some of the immediate side effects.

Yasir Batalvi, a 24-year-old from Boston, volunteered to get the vaccine and received the two doses after signing a 22-page consent form. He shared his experience with CNN:

“The actual injection felt, at first, just like a flu shot, which is basically just a little pinch in the side of your arm,” Batalvi said. “Once I left the hospital, that evening, the stiffness got a little bit worse. It was definitely manageable, but you kind of don’t really feel like moving your arm too far above your shoulder. But the side effects are pretty localized. I mean, it’s just in the muscle in your arm. And that’s about it. It doesn’t really affect anything else and you feel fine.”

That was after the first dose. But the second dose was different.

“I actually had some pretty significant symptoms after I got the second dose. Once I got the second dose, I was fine while I was in the hospital. But that evening was rough. I mean, I developed a low-grade fever, and fatigue and chills,” Batalvi said. He said he was out for that day and evening, but he “felt ready to go by the next morning.”He said he called the study doctors to let them know about his symptoms. They weren’t alarmed and told him he shouldn’t be either.Feeling under the weather does not mean that you got Covid-19 from the vaccine — in fact, experts say having this kind of reaction shows that your body is responding the way it should, and it should not deter anyone from getting vaccinated or going back for their second dose. (source)

Doctors have urged the CDC to be transparent about the fact that the side effects of the vaccine are “not a walk in the park.”

Dr. Sandra Fryhofer of the American Medical Association said both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccines require two doses at varying intervals. As a practicing physician, she said she worries whether her patients will come back for a second dose because of the potentially unpleasant side effects they may experience after the first shot.

“We really need to make patients aware that this is not going to be a walk in the park,” Fryhofer said during a virtual meeting with the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, an outside group of medical experts that advise the CDC. She is also a liaison to the committee. “They are going to know they had a vaccine. They are probably not going to feel wonderful. But they’ve got to come back for that second dose…

…One North Carolina woman in the Moderna study who is in her 50s said she didn’t experience a fever but suffered a bad migraine that left her drained for a day and unable to focus. She said she woke up the next day feeling better after taking Excedrin but added that Moderna may need to tell people to take a day off after a second dose.

“If this proves to work, people are going to have to toughen up,” she said. “The first dose is no big deal. And then the second dose will definitely put you down for the day for sure. … You will need to take a day off after the second dose.” (source)

These are the immediate side effects but only time will tell if there are long-term side effects.

Does the United States intend to mandate the vaccine?

Joe Biden has said that the vaccine will not be made mandatory on a federal level. The thing is, these decisions are usually made on a state level.

Some government officials are already talking about mandating the vaccine. Virginia State Health Commissioner, Dr. Norman Oliver, is all for mandatory Covid vaccinations.

State Health Commissioner Dr. Norman Oliver told 8News on Friday that he plans to mandate coronavirus vaccinations for Virginians once one is made available to the public.

Virginia state law gives the Commissioner of Health the authority to mandate immediate immunizations during a public health crisis if a vaccine is available. Health officials say an immunization could be released as early as 2021.

Dr. Oliver says that, as long as he is still the Health Commissioner, he intends to mandate the coronavirus vaccine…

…Oliver believes that, in the case of COVID-19, public health takes precedent over choice. He said herd immunity is the state’s best defense to stop the spread. (source)

Despite his health commissioner’s enthusiasm, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam has said he is not planning to mandate the vaccine at this time.

The Virginia health commissioner is not alone in his desire to mandate the vaccination. The New York State Bar has also recommended it be mandatory for residents of the state.

All this being said, there doesn’t seem to be a direct plan to pass laws making people take the vaccine.

Can the government actually make people take a vaccine?

Actually, yes.

But there is legislative precedent dating back to a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1905 called Jacobson v. Massachusetts that allows the government to mandate vaccinations.

In that case, the Supreme Court said that states have under their police powers, which is under the Constitution, the authority to enact reasonable regulations as necessary to protect public health, public safety, and the common good. Vaccination mandates constitute exactly that kind of permissible state action to protect the public’s health. Even though it’s 115 years old, this continues to be the benchmark case on the state’s power to mandate vaccination.

In response to the argument about this individual liberty interest, the court said that sometimes individual interests might have to yield to state laws that endeavor to protect the health of everybody—the “common good.” The court said: “The rights of the individual may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint to be enforced by reasonable regulations as the safety of the general public may demand.”

So, yes: Once COVID vaccines are available, states could elect to require that people who live within that state be vaccinated. (source)

Despite this law being in place, mandating the vaccine will probably not be the first method used by the government.

Will Americans be forced or persuaded?

So what happens during a pandemic when there’s a vaccine that people are hesitant to take? Will we be forcibly immunized against our will?

It’s likely to be a much different approach than a SWAT team breaching your house in the middle of the night, holding down your family members, and stabbing them with syringes. If a widespread push is made to get people to take this vaccine, it will likely be a case of making life difficult for those who opt-out and more pleasant for those who opt-in.

People are desperate to resume some kind of normalcy, which will certainly be part of the campaign for vaccination. As we move into the second round of lockdowns, folks just want to have holidays with their families. Millions have been pushed into poverty. Mental health issues abound from the months of isolation. It’s difficult to connect with others and people want to resume their lives.

And if that’s not enough to persuade them to roll up their sleeve for an injection, following are some of the possibilities that have been mentioned to “encourage” Americans to take the vaccine when it becomes available.

Your kids may have to take it to go to school.

Most states already require that children be vaccinated against polio, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis, measles, rumps, and rubella, chickenpox, and hepatitis B unless they hold an exemption that is valid in that state. Exemptions are generally related to medical issues, religious beliefs, or personal philosophy.

It’s likely that a mandatory Covid vaccine for children to attend school would vary from state to state.  Children have generally not become very ill with this particular virus and have seemed less likely than adults to contract it. (There have, of course, been some exceptions.) To some, that would indicate children did not need to undergo the risk of taking yet another vaccine. Dr. Christine Turley, M.D., Pediatrics Specialist and vice-chair of research at Atrium Health Levine Children’s Hospital believes it could be beneficial.

However, school-bound children could spread the virus to parents, grandparents, and others with underlying health conditions. Vaccinating children could eliminate one major source of coronavirus spread, possibly increasing the effectiveness of herd immunity (source)

And even if your kids are attending school via Zoom, it may not exempt them. I spoke to one parent whose children are engaged in distance learning in Massachusetts. Although they will not be setting foot on school property, they are still required to have proof that they are up to date on all required vaccinations.

Employers could insist that employees be vaccinated.

You could potentially lose your job if you refuse to take a vaccine that your employer has deemed mandatory. Legal and public health expert Joanne Rosen, a senior lecturer in Health Policy and Management and the Center for Law and the Public’s Health, spoke about the topic of mandatory vaccinations with Public Health On Call podcast host Stephanie Desmon.

An employer has to have a “reasonable basis.” If you worked in retail, I’m not sure a corporate entity could require that. They may want you to and recommend it, but it wouldn’t be reasonably related to the requirements of their job.

But in sectors in which the employees are themselves at greater risk of contracting vaccine-preventable illnesses or who work with populations that are especially vulnerable if they do get sick, like hospital workers, health care workers, and people who work in [long-term care] facilities, employers have required that their staff be vaccinated against the flu each year.

Another thing that states could do, short of a requirement across the board that everybody be vaccinated, is they could begin with a mandate that focuses on those sectors—people who are themselves at greater risk or who work in proximity with vulnerable populations. We don’t want the employees themselves getting sick and being a bridge, or “vector,” to infecting others who are vulnerable. People may object, but some more targeted form of vaccine mandate may make sense and also be possible. (source)

Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, told TODAY there were a few exceptions:

Employees who are part of a union may be exempt from the vaccine requirement.

Anti-discrimination laws also provide some limits. If you can’t get the vaccine for medical reasons, that could be a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which would require an employer to accommodate you. That could mean requiring you to wear a mask on the job or have limited contact with other people, Reiss said.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 may protect people who have a religious objection to a vaccine. An employer would have to make a reasonable accommodation as long as it’s not too costly for the business.

These laws apply only to companies with 15 or more employees, so smaller businesses are exempt.

“We think about employers as this huge, amorphous thing, but under the law, they’re also private entities with rights, especially if it’s a small mom and pop shop,” Reiss noted. (source)

Consider how some workplaces require all employees to receive a flu shot – the Covid vaccine could be enforced in a similar manner. Health care workers and those involved in education are most likely to be the first to face such requirements.

Businesses could require patrons to show proof of vaccination.

Even if a state or federal mandate is not in place, privately owned businesses could potentially require patrons to show proof of vaccination before they receive service.

Can airlines, restaurants, stores and stadiums make the vaccine a condition of doing business with you?

Yes, within the anti-discrimination laws mentioned above.

“They can decide to refuse service to you for pretty much any reason,” Reiss said, pointing out a policy most shoppers are already familiar with: no shirt, no shoes, no service.

People who are covered by anti-discrimination laws can’t just demand a business let them do whatever they want. The company just has to give you a reasonable accommodation, so a store might refuse you entry but offer curbside pick-up of groceries. (source)

Private businesses can set their own policies. Ticketmaster, the purveyor of tickets for concerts, plays, and just about any public event, has already “been working on a framework for post-pandemic fan safety” that would use their phones to confirm whether they’ve been vaccinated or had a negative test within the past couple of days. Billboard reports:

Here’s how it would work, if approved: After purchasing a ticket for a concert, fans would need to verify that they have already been vaccinated (which would provide approximately one year of COVID-19 protection) or test negative for coronavirus approximately 24 to 72 hours prior to the concert. The length of coverage a test would provide would be governed by regional health authorities — if attendees of a Friday night concert had to be tested 48 hours in advance, most could start the testing process the day before the event. If it was a 24-hour window,  most people would likely be tested the same day of the event at a lab or a health clinic.

Once the test was complete, the fan would instruct the lab to deliver the results to their health pass company, like CLEAR or IBM. If the tests were negative, or the fan was vaccinated, the health pass company would verify the attendee’s COVID-19 status to Ticketmaster, which would then issue the fan the credentials needed to access the event. If a fan tested positive or didn’t take a test to verify their status, they would not be granted access to the event. There are still many details to work out, but the goal of the program is for fans to take care of vaccines and testing prior to the concert and not show up hoping to be tested onsite.

Ticketmaster would not store or have access to fans’ medical records and would only receive verification of whether a fan is cleared to attend an event on a given date. (source)

This isn’t a definite plan but the fact that it’s in the works means the idea could spread to sporting events, shopping centers, movie theaters, or any other venue in which people are in close proximity with one another.

Your eligibility for a $1500 stimulus check could depend on it.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Former Pfizer Science Officer Reveals Great Covid-19 Scam – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2020

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/11/joseph-mercola/former-pfizer-science-officer-reveals-great-covid-19-scam/

By Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

I’ve written several articles about scientists and medical doctors who question the official narrative about the COVID-19 pandemic and the global measures put into place because of it, from useless testing, mask wearing and social distancing, to lockdowns, tracking and tracing and the baseless fearmongering driving it all.

In the video above, British journalist Anna Brees interviews Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer and founder and CEO of the biotech company Ziarco, now owned by Novartis.

In it, he discusses several concerns, including his belief that widespread PCR testing is creating the false idea that the pandemic is resurging, as the total mortality rate is completely normal. He also discusses his concerns about COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

PCR Testing Is Causing a False ‘Casedemic’

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Covid Hysteria and the Groomers of the Virus Patrol – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 12, 2020

And, yes, here’s the list of the top five firms being supported by billions from Washington in the race for a Covid vaccine, which may or may not happen, but whether safe or not will be of no never-mind to Big Pharma.

After all, Washington has already indemnified them against lawsuits; pretty much guaranteed that they can name their charge per dose; and will be doing all it can to make getting a tap on the arm from one or more of the Big Pharma competitors a mandatory duty of citizenship.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/06/david-stockman/covid-hysteria-and-the-groomers-of-the-virus-patrol/

By

David Stockman’s Contra Corner

Dr. Fauci and the Scarf Lady are not the only Virus Patrol miscreants spreading the Covid Hysteria and thereby empowering the authorities to keep suffocating everyday economic life and personal liberty in America.

In fact, there is a whole camarilla of current and former health officials, purported disease experts, all-purpose talking heads and other Washington apparatchiks who continue to appear on mainstream media, peddling the hoary tale that coronavirus is some kind of horror flick monster: It purportedly just keeps springing from its Lockdown grave – whack-a-mole fashion – the instant officialdom relaxes its quarantine edicts.

Call these people the “groomers” of Big Pharma, and their job is to keep public fears on the boil so that the demand for high-priced treatments, cures and preventative vaccines becomes overwhelming. And given that the Covid is now rapidly succumbing to the exhaustion of its infection cycle and the summertime sun, their exact current mission is one of bridging the gap.

That is, finding and publicizing local outbreaks and “hot spots” during the months just ahead so that the Virus Patrol will remain in full control of policy and the narrative until the Covid makes its forecasted second wave rebound during next fall’s flu season.

After all, they desperately need these hot spots to keep the aggregate narrative alive because it is visibly collapsing by the day.

Back in early May, for instance, the NYT breathlessly carried a leaked study from the Trump Administration that projected a massive surge of new infections and a near doubling of daily death rates by early June relative to levels than extant:

As President Trump presses for states to reopen their economies, his administration is privately projecting a steady rise in the number of coronavirus cases and deaths over the next several weeks. The daily death toll will reach about 3,000 on June 1, according to an internal document obtained by The New York Times, a 70 percent increase from the current number of about 1,750.

The projections, based on government modeling pulled together by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, forecast about 200,000 new cases each day by the end of the month, up from about 25,000 cases a day currently.

The numbers underscore a sobering reality: The United States has been hunkered down for the past seven weeks to try slowing the spread of the virus, but reopening the economy will make matters worse.

Needless to say, that one went down the memory hole ages ago (i.e. around Memorial Day). As of June 10, in fact, actual daily averages for the month to date were:

  • 827 deaths per day, representing a 53% decline, not a 70% increase;
  • 20,694 new cases per day, representing a 17% decline, not an 8X increase;

In other words, these Washington modelers (this one was prepared by FEMA) couldn’t hit the broadside of a barn with the antiaircraft guns Chairman Kim uses to dispatch his adversaries. So to keep the Covid-Hysteria alive, they send out the hot spot “groomers”.

On of the most mendacious of these groomers is Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who was the Donald’s first FDA commissioner and is an alleged pedigreed “conservative” with a berth at the American Enterprise Institute to burnish his numerous sinecures with Big Pharma.

Gottlieb is also a CNBC regular, and yesterday, sitting astride a screen crawler which read “Texas reports second day of record hospitalizations”, he was busy promulgating the “hot spot” news about two red states, whose merely semi-craven GOP governors have belatedly attempted to get their economies back in business:

When you look at hotspot regions like Arizona and Texas, they have to be concerned, particularly areas around Houston right now. They could lose control of this very quickly,” says @ScottGottliebMD on balancing re-opening with public health.

We call bullshit!

Gottlieb was peddling a pimple on the elephant’s ass because, apparently, cable TV audiences generally and bubble vision’s especially, were born yesterday. That is, they are infantile victims of recency and confirmation biases and will apparently believe anything served up in a context-free modality. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »