USE ONLY A FEW WORDS.
ONLY SAY WHAT SUPPORTS YOUR CASE.
PUT THE FACTS INTO CONTEXT.
Federal health officials provide potential timeline for Pfizer vaccine distribution starting this December| Added November 10
Things are moving right along: just one day after Pfizer issued a press release on the efficacy of their vaccine, federal health officials have provided in-depth projections for the vaccine’s distribution, beginning this year. The excerpt below references the Food and Drug Administration franting emergency authorization for Eli Lilly’s Covid-19 treatment. We’ve posted that story separately, directly below this one.
Federal health officials on Tuesday provided the most detailed projections to date about when a wider swath of Americans may be able to begin to receive Covid-19 vaccines, once any is authorized, and treatments outside of an experimental setting, and about what that could look like.
People deemed highest priority — perhaps health care workers or nursing home residents — could be vaccinated in December, with more widespread vaccination to come in the first months of next year, the officials said, laying out an ambitious timeline that could well be thwarted by delays.
The forecasting follows two encouraging developments on Monday: positive clinical-trial results from a vaccine front-runner and an emergency authorization for a Covid-19 treatment. The vaccine candidate, made by Pfizer and BioNTech, was found in an early analysis to be more than 90 percent effective in preventing Covid-19, and Pfizer is expected to submit its data for review by the Food and Drug Administration once it has the necessary safety data next week. No coronavirus vaccine has yet been authorized by the U.S. federal government. The treatment, a monoclonal antibody developed by the drug maker Eli Lilly similar to the one President Trump had taken, is beginning to be shipped out to states this week.
In a series of media appearances on Tuesday, Alex M. Azar II, the secretary of health and human services, mapped out a potential timeline for distributing Pfizer’s vaccine, if it receives authorization as is widely hoped. In December, the focus would be on vaccinating the most vulnerable groups. Those groups have not yet been determined, but recommendations from experts have zeroed in on health care workers, first responders and older Americans in nursing homes and assisted-living facilities.
FDA grants emergency authorization to Eli Lilly’s Covid-19 treatment | Added November 10
Everyone say hello to bamlanivimab, Eli Lilly’s Covid-19 treatment that has just received emergency authorization from the Food and Drug Administration. You may recall that in mid-October that the National Institute of Health paused Remember Eli Lilly just had to shut down or somesuch. And when it comes to vaccines FDA emergency approval xyz…
The Food and Drug Administration has granted emergency authorization of a Covid-19 treatment made by the American pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly that was given to Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor, when he was infected with the coronavirus.
The authorization, announced on Monday, applies only to people newly infected with the virus, and the agency said it should not be used in hospitalized patients. The treatment is approved for people 12 and older who have tested positive and are at risk of developing a severe form of Covid-19 or being hospitalized for the condition. That includes people who are over 65 and obese, the agency said — a key group that early studies have shown can benefit the most from the treatment.
Eli Lilly said that its treatment, called bamlanivimab, should be administered as soon as possible after a positive test, and within 10 days of developing symptoms.
Biden names the members of his Covid19 advisory board | Added November 9
Other members of the board include
President-elect Joe Biden announced Monday the members of a COVID-19 advisory board as he transitions into the White House. The roster of experts and doctors will help guide his administration as it confronts a rapidly worsening crisis that has already killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and infected millions more.
The board will be co-chaired by three public health heavyweights: Dr. David Kessler, a former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration under President Bill Clinton; Dr. Vivek Murthy, who served as surgeon general under President Barack Obama; and Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith, a professor of public health at Yale University.
The board will also include a slate of global health experts, infectious disease researchers and doctors.
“Dealing with the coronavirus pandemic is one of the most important battles our administration will face, and I will be informed by science and by experts,” Biden said in a statement. “The advisory board will help shape my approach to managing the surge in reported infections; ensuring vaccines are safe, effective, and distributed efficiently, equitably, and free; and protecting at-risk populations.”
Smoking gun: Fauci states COVID test has fatal flaw; confession from the “beloved” expert of experts | Added November 6
The COVID delusion is finished, blown apart
By Jon Rappoport
OK, here we go. Smoking gun. Jackpot.
Right from the horse’s mouth. Right from the man we’re told is the number-one COVID expert in the nation. What Fauci says is golden truth.
Well, how about THIS?
July 16, 2020, podcast, “This week in virology”: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.
Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark): “…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication- confident [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”
Each “cycle” of the test is a quantum leap in amplification and magnification of the test specimen taken from the patient.
Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.
That’s called a false positive.
What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.
Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…
Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…
The total number of COVID cases in America—which is based on the test—is a gross falsity.
The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.
Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. This is the crime in a nutshell.
If anyone in the White House has a few brain cells to rub together, pick up a giant bullhorn and start revealing the truth to the American people.
“Hello, America, you’ve been tricked, lied to, conned, and taken for a devastating ride. On the basis of fake science, the country was locked down.”
If anyone in the Congress has a few brain cells operating, pull Fauci into a televised hearing and, in ten minutes, make mincemeat out of the fake science that has driven this whole foul, stench-ridden assault on the US economy and its citizens.
All right, here are two chunks of evidence for what I’ve written above. First, we have a CDC quote on the FDA website, in a document titled: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” See page 35. This document is marked, “Effective: 07/13/20.” That means, even though the virus is being referred to by its older name, the document is still relevant as of July 2020. “For Emergency Use Only” refers to the fact that the FDA has certified the PCR test under a traditional category called “Emergency Use Authorization.”
FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles (< 40.00 Ct).”
Naturally, MANY testing labs reading this guideline would conclude, “Well, to see if the virus is there in a patient, we should run the test all the way to 40 cycles. That’s the official advice.”
Then we have a New York Times article (August 29/updated September 17) headlined: “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” Here are money quotes:
“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.” “Set the limit” would usually mean, “We’re going to look all the way to 40 cycles, to see if the virus is there.”
The Times: “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients.” Boom. That’s the capper, the grand finale. Labs don’t or won’t reveal their collusion in this crime.
Get the picture?
I hope so.
If a lawyer won’t go to court with all this, or if a judge won’t pay attention and see the light, they should be stripped of their jobs and sent to the Arctic to sell snow.
Covid airplane| Added October 26
The air supply systems on commercial aircraft offer greater protection against COVID-19 than those in hospital operating rooms, research commissioned by the US Department of Defense (DOD) found.
The overall risk of exposure to COVID-19 on a flight is “very low,” the research concluded — and “virtually nonexistent” if you wear a mask.
If only one passenger on a Boeing 767 or 777 flight is infected, it would take a flight of around 54 hours for others onboard to get an infectious dose of the virus, researchers found.
The world’s longest flight, between Singapore and Newark, New Jersey, is 18 hours long.
However, researchers acknowledged that the test was limited because it was based on the flight having just one infected passenger, and didn’t involve passengers moving around the cabin.
Immunity; school infection rate | Added July
Reinfected | Added July
Covid collection (not this one)
Horror of the week
Pros and cons of masks
No spike after protests
Autopsies Greatest Hits
PCR testing has previously been responsible for pseudo-epidemics; the CDC extensively covered three examples in their August 24, 2007 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report titled Outbreaks of Respiratory Illness Mistakenly Attributed to Pertussis — New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Tennessee, 2004–2006. Pertussis, or whooping cough, is fatal for both infants and some adults, and its symptoms are nondescript much like Covid-19: runny nose, watery eyes, a fever, and, eventually, a severe cough.
The report notes that in 1997 with the “introduction of PCR test results into the pertussis case definition…the percentage of cases confirmed by PCR increased from 12% in 1997 to 44% in 2005, and the percentage of cases confirmed by culture decreased from 52% in 1997 to 20% in 2005. Overall, during 1997–2005, the number of PCR-confirmed cases increased while the number of culture-confirmed cases remained stable.”
The report also presciently warns that “overreliance on the results of PCR assays can lead to implementation of unnecessary and resource-intensive control measures…” and it cautions that “in outbreak settings, positive PCR results should be interpreted in conjunction with epidemiologic investigation, evaluation of clinical symptoms, and confirmation by culture.”
Dartmouth Medicine published a retrospective in 2007 detailing the response to the supposed outbreak in New Hampshire at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center’s: after a few employees developed a bad cough they feared it was whooping cough, and PCR “confirmed” their suspicions. 1,000 employees were screened and tested, ill people were ordered home, prophylactic antibiotics were given to “1,300 contacts of suspected cases,” and over 4,500 people were vaccinated in a three day period. 98 PCR-confirmed positive cases came back.
8 months later employees were informed that it was a false alarm after the PCR test results were sent for confirmatory testing.
The New York Times covered the entire incident at length: “Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed with the definitive test, growing the bacterium, Bordetella pertussis, in the laboratory. Instead, it appears the health care workers probably were afflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common cold.”
As mentioned above, there were two other instances of this; regarding pseudo-epidemics and “an overreliance on such molecular tests” as the Polymerase Chain Reaction process, Dr. Trish M. Perl, an epidemiologist, told the times “It’s a problem; we know it’s a problem,” and “my guess is that what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common.”
Fast forward to today: the results of antibody tests further muddy the situation for us now because, as the CDC states on their own website, “there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold.”
This is not to mention the contaminated and “dubious” test kits that were rolled out.
Lastly the entire notion of a “case” count is moot as there have been reports of case inflation: the CDC admitted to combining the figures from both PCR test results, and antibody test results (ie recovered patients) back in May. Also in May, officials from the U.K. admitted that saliva and nasal samples taken from the same patient were being counted as two tests instead of one. In all of this there has been no mention of confirmatory lab culture tests of these results.
Dr. Kathryn Kirkland and her DHMC infection control team sprang into action: screening and testing almost 1,000 employees (16% of the staff); ordering ill people to stay home; giving prophylactic antibiotics to 1,300 contacts of suspected cases; and vaccinating over 4,500 people (72% of the staff) in a three-day period. There were 134 suspected cases, with 98 of them considered positive (33 definite and 65 indeterminate) based on a molecular test called polymerase chain reaction (PCR).
“Once you conclude pertussis is circulating, then any respiratory symptom has to be considered as possibly suspect pertussis,” Kirkland explains, “because early in the first week of the illness, the symptoms are just cold symptoms—runny nose, runny eyes, congestion. That’s the time at which people are the most contagious.”
Then, months after the outbreak ended, DHMC officials announced that it might not have been pertussis after all. Follow- up testing failed to confirm the PCR results. The 27 specimens sent to the state health department for traditional culture testing were negative, and those sent to the Centers for Disease Control for PCR yielded just one positive result.
Diagnosing illnesses like pertussis is complicated, and positive results from molecular tests are hard to confirm. A culture test is still considered the gold standard, though it is less sensitive and may not detect individuals with mild infections.
“In any of these PCR tests you start out with what’s called a primer—that is, a short length of DNA that is meant to mimic the DNA that would be found in the bacterium you’re trying to identify,” says AuBuchon. The bacterial DNA binds to the primer DNA, and the enzyme systems “identify this coupling and then produce more DNA that ultimately gets amplified and identified.” DHMC’s assay has 50 to 100 copies of the DNA target per bacterium. The CDC used an assay with only one target per organism. “So,” says AuBuchon, “it was easier for us to find [pertussis] because of the 100-fold natural amplification.”
While 142 people tested positive for the illness, a secondary set of tests revealed they were not infected with the bacterium, Bordetella pertussis.
Instead those individuals were found to be suffering from respiratory diseases, including the common cold.
The inaccuracy of the quick tests was similar to a rumored outbreak in Boston last fall and brought attention to what John Hopkins Hospital epidemiologist Dr. Trish M. Perl.
“It’s a problem; we know it’s a problem,” Perl told the Times. “My guess is that what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common.”
For months, nearly everyone involved thought the medical center had had a huge whooping cough outbreak, with extensive ramifications. Nearly 1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in; 142 people, including Dr. Herndon, were told they appeared to have the disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some in intensive care.
Then, about eight months later, health care workers were dumbfounded to receive an e-mail message from the hospital administration informing them that the whole thing was a false alarm.
Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed with the definitive test, growing the bacterium, Bordetella pertussis, in the laboratory. Instead, it appears the health care workers probably were afflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common cold.
We are currently being bombarded with reports of skyrocketing case counts all around the world, alongside a healthy helping of guilt and blame for not taking the pandemic seriously enough, or not wearing masks. But as we have consistently reported here, PCR testing has called any and all claims of rising case counts into question, and antibody testing does nothing to add to their claims.
To add to this, there have been past incidences of false epidemics based that were based on PCR testing, the CDC’s own website notes the unreliability of antibody testing, and there is the CDC’s own past admission of inflating case counts. Taken together, this alone demonstrates that this so-called pandemic is largely fabricated through the mismanagement of data and information, irrespective of any clandestine agenda.
This article which we shared earlier covered the basics of the issue with PCR testing which we have covered before: Kari Mullis is the inventor, who you can watch an interview of here where he discusses the gold standard(?). We also shared the chapter of his book where he discussed the invention of PCR, and there is this interview with journalist Celia Farber who talks about the details and actually spoke with Mullis before his death in 2018(?), and Eric’s understanding of PCR.
In the new article above, however, mention is made of a false whooping cough epidemic that occurred at Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center. Employees were vaccinated, isolated, and treated for whooping cough
As for antibody testing, the CDC states on their own website regarding Covid-19 and antibody testing:
“A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold.”
And, related to the general issue of miscounting in the U.S. — whether it is how deaths are counted, or how hospitalizations are conflated with patients who are showing no symptoms of Covid-19 and are there for other reasons — the CDC has previously admitted to lumping together test results from both PCR testing and antibody testing, effectively doubling the count.
All of this in combination should, at the very least, cast doubt on the spurious claim that cases are rising and thus we should panic further. That happened at Dartmouth and at Children’s Hospital Boston. But, instead of whooping cough, they were dealing with no more than the common cold. This time, the coronavirus has become our bogeyman…
Government health officials say cases have tripled in the United States since 2001, with nearly 26,000 cases reported in 2005. Nearly half of those cases were diagnosed with the testing method now called into question, and that has raised doubts about the true number of cases.
“Are we in fact seeing an increase?” asked Dr. Tom Clark, summarizing what some are wondering. Clark, a CDC epidemiologist, is co-author of the report on the misdiagnoses.
In April 2004, a 5-week-old infant in one Tennessee community, which CDC wouldn’t identify, was diagnosed with whooping cough. Health officials began looking for the illness in other residents. Ultimately nearly 1,500 people were checked or offered antibiotics; 43 tested positive at first. But the more reliable test turned up negative results for all except the baby, the CDC said.
“It’s been a roller coaster. Whoa, looks at this big outbreak! Whoa, it wasn’t really pertussis!” said Dr. William Schaffner, chairman of Vanderbilt University’s department of preventive medicine.
Suspected pertussis in HCP was defined as either 1) cough of any duration and at least one classic pertussis symptom (i.e., paroxysms of coughing, whoop, or posttussive vomiting) or 2) a positive or equivocal PCR test result.
Review of surveillance data revealed no increased pertussis activity in the surrounding community. No pertussis cases were identified among vaccinated or unvaccinated infants, either in the hospital or surrounding community.
Substantial resources were invested to control this outbreak. During March–May 2006, approximately 1,700 visits by HCP to the occupational medicine clinic for respiratory illness were reported. Among 6,289 hospital HCP, 978 (16%) ill HCP were tested by PCR, treated, and furloughed pending negative PCR results. An additional 1,311 contacts of HCP with suspected pertussis received PEP. Other control measures included a 1-week Tdap vaccination campaign in May, during which 4,524 (72%) HCP were vaccinated.[Mass] Of the 32 PCR-positive specimens submitted for culture, none yielded B. pertussis.
Presumed false-positive PCR test results in persons with nonspecific clinical features, such as rhinorrhea, sneezing, and sore throat, have raised concerns regarding the widespread application of PCR in an outbreak setting (6).
Overreliance on the results of PCR assays can lead to implementation of unnecessary and resource-intensive control measures (e.g., case identification, antimicrobial treatment, furlough of ill persons, and administration of PEP)
In outbreak settings, positive PCR results should be interpreted in conjunction with epidemiologic investigation, evaluation of clinical symptoms, and confirmation by culture.
-past fake epidemic-
-CDC on antibody results-
-study calling antibody results into question-
Feature: Pros and cons of masks | Added July
Feature: Horror of the week
Feature: No spike in NYC ‘cases’ following protests | Added July
There has been no virus surge following the protests in New York City which began on May 27. The common refrain has been that the reason there has been no surge among the George Floyd protests is that there was 100% mask usage by the protesters. That is not true as in the early portion of the protest, mask usage was much more lax as pictures and video footage show. And when there was, it wasn’t 100%. Combine that with the fact that the current fervor around mask is exactly that — current.
After the police killed George Floyd in Minneapolis, tens of thousands of New Yorkers poured into the streets to protest police brutality and racism.
Epidemiologists braced for a surge of new coronavirus cases. But it has not come yet.
On May 27, the day before the protests began in New York City, some 754 Covid-19 cases were diagnosed, according to the city’s Department of Health. That was the last time the city recorded more than 700 cases on a single day.
Feature: Vitamin D
Debunking the second wave
Covid-19 sniffing dogs
NYT repeats wet market lie [June 7]
The Gravy Train
Keepsake: ‘Debunking the second wave’ | Added July 7
Keepsake: Covid-19 sniffing dogs | Added June 17
Dogs sniff Covid
Keepsake: NY Times repeats wet market lie
Keepsake: The gravy train | Added June 5
And so, another working week will soon draw to a close. Not a moment too soon, yes? This is, you may recall, our treasured signal to daydream about weekend plans. Our agenda is exceedingly modest, since we must keep one eye on the firehose of news. Otherwise, we hope to catch up on our naps and stroll with the official mascot. And what about you? This may be a good time to engage in spring cleaning or you could reach out to someone feeling isolated. You might also want to help the economy by purchasing some new masks. Or simply take stock of the world. Well, whatever you do, have a sunny time. Be safe, and see you soon.
Novovax (NVAX) was awarded a contract by the Department of Defense for up to $60 million to support production of a Covid-19 vaccine that will be manufactured in the U.S. The news comes after the company failed to make the cut as one of the five vaccine finalists selected for the Operation Warp Speed project. The agreement includes a 2020 delivery of 10 million doses for DoD that could be used in Phase 2/3 clinical trials or under an Emergency Use Authorization if approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
AstraZeneca (AZN) found partners to manufacture and distribute 2 billion doses of an experimental Covid-19 vaccine created by Oxford University, STAT notes. The CEPI and Gavi vaccines alliance will spend $750 million to manufacture and make available 300 million doses by the end of the year, assuming the vaccine is safe and effective. And a licensing deal was struck with SII, formerly the Serum Institute of India, to supply 1 billion doses to low- and middle-income countries. SII committed to provide 400 million doses before the end of 2020.
More than 30 organizations wrote Congress last month to oppose the principles proposed by Democratic lawmakers on COVID-19 drug pricing — no exclusivity, stop profiteering, and full transparency — because those principles were “dangerous” and “unacceptable. Of the 31 organizations listed in the May 7 letter, at least 15 had received funding from the pharmaceutical industry between 2015 and 2019, according to the Public Citizen advocacy group. And during this period, these groups collectively received $2.5 million from industry.
A vaccine summit hosted by the U.K. government raised billions of dollars to immunize children in developing countries as experts wrestled with the difficult question of how any potential vaccine against Covid-19 might be distributed globally and fairly, the Associated Press writes. The event raised $8.8 billion, exceeding its target, for the GAVI vaccines alliance, which says the funds will be used to vaccinate about 300 million children in dozens of countries against such diseases as malaria, pneumonia, and HPV.
Just days after joining Operation Warp Speed, the venture partnering government with private companies in the vaccine race, Peter Marks quit to return to his FDA job full time, Politico reports. The move came after a clash with White House coronavirus coordinator Deborah Birx over how the government was prioritizing potential vaccine. The abrupt switch was the latest sign of the FDA’s struggle to fend off outside political pressure, particularly from the White House, during the desperate search for a coronavirus cure.
Keepsake: CDC Death rate
Keepsake: Vaccine story 2 | Added May
Keepsake: Leaked dossier, comes from lab | Added May
Keepsake: Humans may have had coronavirus | Added May
Keepsake: Bat lab grants | Added May