Great reporting. I'm old enough to remember when writing like this would be on the op-ed page of a newspaper, or a long letter to the editor. Guys like you and Gary Taubes are some of the few science writers who somehow maintain credibility. Taubes' exposes of the sugar and Gov't food pyramid industries showed me not only that someone like the much maligned Atkins was right, but that the "experts" are gov and corporate lackeys - not to be trusted.
As a veteran observer of the vaccine industry it is not my impression that the manufacturers often make statements over which they could be sued - and with vaccines they are also not involved in direct advertising. They leave the dirty work to health officials, doctors, journalists, politicians, unpleasant bullies with no lability and often no particular knowledge of what they are talking about. If the claim of about 95% efficacy was not completely untrue it was certainly very misleading. But of course what Walensky admits doing is reacting like an opportunistic politician and not as someone with expert knowledge. Further, there is another narrative which should not be ignored - for most of 2020 it was being acknowledged that these products were not going to be effective
and the “good news” began to come out as soon as it was clear that Trump would be forced to leave office. In my view that is what changed. And why perhaps Walensky was more interested in the news cycle rather than the science.
patsy: person who is easily manipulated or victimized
Clearly the latter doesn't apply to this elite Ivy Leaguer. Nor to her West Coast acolyte, Dr. Monica Gandi, whose twitter threads consolidated the press releases of how these miracle vaccines would prevent hospitalization.
These well paid PhRMA mouthpieces are basically delivering "hope and prayers" to MSM stenographers while gagging skeptics so they can argue, "Nobody said..."
Ghandhi did say this very recently: "They want more baby virus copies of themselves; they don't usually evolve to kill their host more readily because that's actually not very smart." https://www.alternet.org/2021/11/more/
In January of this year, she tells us that we should forget about cases and just focus on hospitalizations. "Ever since we've had vaccines, we've had uncoupling of cases and hospitalizations. It's never been more dramatic than it is now with Omicron. In highly vaccinated or immune places, really high cases, really low hospitalizations and deaths."
Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein
"Our modeling suggests that SARS-CoV-2 mutants with one or two mildly deleterious mutations are expected to exist in high numbers due to neutral genetic variation, and consequently resistance to vaccines or other prophylactics that rely on one or two antibodies for protection can develop quickly -and repeatedly- under positive selection. Predicted resistance timelines are comparable to those of the decay kinetics of nAbs raised against vaccinal or natural antigens, raising a second potential mechanism for loss of immunity in the population. Strategies for viral elimination should therefore be diversified across molecular targets and therapeutic modalities."
And shouldn't we be concerned about how ACE2 is down-regulated--whether it comes from the virus or the vax?
Mechanisms of Immunothrombosis in Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT) Compared to Natural SARS-CoV-2 Infection
The ACE2 receptor is a key component of the Renin-Angiotensin System (RAS) [14] and also impacts on platelet function with both SARS-CoV-2 virus particles or spike-protein-mediated platelet dysregulation as one theoretically common denominator for vascular pathology between native infection and vaccines [15].
By virtue of his interview at Fox, was the infamous Dr. Bridle wrong to push back on the CDC mouthpieces in claiming that Covid is NOT a pandemic of the unvaccinated. "If you have a biological entity that's prone to mutation, and the SARS Corona 2, like all Corona viruses is prone to mutation... and you apply a narrowly focused (on a single protein of the virus), selective pressure that is non-lethal and you do this over a long period of time, this is the recipe for driving the emergence of novel variants."
As a retired, long time liberal physician, I am so, so sick of big PhRMA's control of the narrative. It's not really politicized because because profit is bipartisan. Flip control of Congress in November and we'll see Rs feeding at the PhRMA trough.
Walensky's wriggling to excuse herself from responsibility of the Covid AND VAX mayhem that we've endured. Make the 'EMERGENCY' jab makers LIABLE for injuries & deaths following their poisoning of the planet! Mick from Hooe (UK).
You literally "can't make this stuff up" as the saying goes! "See, we opened this fortune cookie, and the note inside said "the new vaccines are 95% effective" so, um, we took it from there . . .
Thank you for putting this timeline together. How does the billion dollar spend from the CDC to promote these jabs come into play here? Is CNN just reposting plagiarized Pfizer press releases from the CDC? Is Pfizer the CDC?
Side note, I thought Fauci disappeared because he became a pariah for the admin. But I think it’s more like the CDC has run out of its advertising budget. Thoughts?
>>An independent group has been keeping an eye on results and side-effects. "To date, the Data Monitoring Committee for the study has not reported any serious safety concerns related to the vaccine," the companies said.<<
>>To date, the Data Monitoring Committee for the study has not reported any serious safety concerns related to the vaccine. <<
How convenient. And it makes for such a tidy press release too!
I find this so strange. When the vaccines were fast-tracked, I thought I read that that safety -- as in risk analysis particularly -- were waved? Is this the Committee that waved that? Or was it Walensky, the FDA? I wish there was a list-form timeline somewhere to keep this stuff straight! And that aside, who was on this Committee? They did a lousy job. Did none of them think to point out that the data did not really reflect 95% effective? Or to come forward and point out details to Walensky for the sake of the nation's well-being? Or did Pfizer put together a rubberstamp committee?
I like your article because it brings up more questions in my head. That's a thought-provoking article that does that....Thank you.
Pppppfyzler and theose other big Harmaceuticals will need the money they have to spend on hacksxxxine injured and a payout to all of us who survive their viruganda
They Harmaceuticals are basically done destroyed womanity and must cease and desist
Great reporting. I'm old enough to remember when writing like this would be on the op-ed page of a newspaper, or a long letter to the editor. Guys like you and Gary Taubes are some of the few science writers who somehow maintain credibility. Taubes' exposes of the sugar and Gov't food pyramid industries showed me not only that someone like the much maligned Atkins was right, but that the "experts" are gov and corporate lackeys - not to be trusted.
I will share this. Thanks again.
As a veteran observer of the vaccine industry it is not my impression that the manufacturers often make statements over which they could be sued - and with vaccines they are also not involved in direct advertising. They leave the dirty work to health officials, doctors, journalists, politicians, unpleasant bullies with no lability and often no particular knowledge of what they are talking about. If the claim of about 95% efficacy was not completely untrue it was certainly very misleading. But of course what Walensky admits doing is reacting like an opportunistic politician and not as someone with expert knowledge. Further, there is another narrative which should not be ignored - for most of 2020 it was being acknowledged that these products were not going to be effective
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3258
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/89512
and the “good news” began to come out as soon as it was clear that Trump would be forced to leave office. In my view that is what changed. And why perhaps Walensky was more interested in the news cycle rather than the science.
"Nobody said"?
patsy: person who is easily manipulated or victimized
Clearly the latter doesn't apply to this elite Ivy Leaguer. Nor to her West Coast acolyte, Dr. Monica Gandi, whose twitter threads consolidated the press releases of how these miracle vaccines would prevent hospitalization.
https://nitter.net/MonicaGandhi9/status/1376381238529847297
These well paid PhRMA mouthpieces are basically delivering "hope and prayers" to MSM stenographers while gagging skeptics so they can argue, "Nobody said..."
Ghandhi did say this very recently: "They want more baby virus copies of themselves; they don't usually evolve to kill their host more readily because that's actually not very smart." https://www.alternet.org/2021/11/more/
Really?
And she told us to trust the preliminary evidence about omicron. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/12/monica-ghandi-the-cautious-case-for-omicron-optimism.html
In January of this year, she tells us that we should forget about cases and just focus on hospitalizations. "Ever since we've had vaccines, we've had uncoupling of cases and hospitalizations. It's never been more dramatic than it is now with Omicron. In highly vaccinated or immune places, really high cases, really low hospitalizations and deaths."
https://www.newsnationnow.com/video/why-dr-monica-gandhi-says-its-almost-time-to-stop-counting-covid-cases-newsnation-prime/7275283/
Is that what the Danish MSM is telling their highly vaccinated populace?
https://www.coronaheadsup.com/europe/denmark/denmark-covid-cases-and-hospitalizations-by-vaccine-status/
UPDATE 21 – 7th March 2022
Hospitalizations in the last 7 days:
Unvaccinated: 220 (10.74%)
Started vaccination: 24 (1.17%)
Full vaccination: 256 (12.49%)
First revaccination: 1,549 (75.60%)
Total fully vaccinated: 1,805 (88.09%)
What about this science? https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250780
Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein
"Our modeling suggests that SARS-CoV-2 mutants with one or two mildly deleterious mutations are expected to exist in high numbers due to neutral genetic variation, and consequently resistance to vaccines or other prophylactics that rely on one or two antibodies for protection can develop quickly -and repeatedly- under positive selection. Predicted resistance timelines are comparable to those of the decay kinetics of nAbs raised against vaccinal or natural antigens, raising a second potential mechanism for loss of immunity in the population. Strategies for viral elimination should therefore be diversified across molecular targets and therapeutic modalities."
And shouldn't we be concerned about how ACE2 is down-regulated--whether it comes from the virus or the vax?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-74715-4
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002944021001942
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8450306/
Mechanisms of Immunothrombosis in Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT) Compared to Natural SARS-CoV-2 Infection
The ACE2 receptor is a key component of the Renin-Angiotensin System (RAS) [14] and also impacts on platelet function with both SARS-CoV-2 virus particles or spike-protein-mediated platelet dysregulation as one theoretically common denominator for vascular pathology between native infection and vaccines [15].
How does the public evaluate "independent" fact checks? https://byrambridle.com/#factch
By virtue of his interview at Fox, was the infamous Dr. Bridle wrong to push back on the CDC mouthpieces in claiming that Covid is NOT a pandemic of the unvaccinated. "If you have a biological entity that's prone to mutation, and the SARS Corona 2, like all Corona viruses is prone to mutation... and you apply a narrowly focused (on a single protein of the virus), selective pressure that is non-lethal and you do this over a long period of time, this is the recipe for driving the emergence of novel variants."
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6266738894001#sp=show-clips
As a retired, long time liberal physician, I am so, so sick of big PhRMA's control of the narrative. It's not really politicized because because profit is bipartisan. Flip control of Congress in November and we'll see Rs feeding at the PhRMA trough.
Walensky's wriggling to excuse herself from responsibility of the Covid AND VAX mayhem that we've endured. Make the 'EMERGENCY' jab makers LIABLE for injuries & deaths following their poisoning of the planet! Mick from Hooe (UK).
You literally "can't make this stuff up" as the saying goes! "See, we opened this fortune cookie, and the note inside said "the new vaccines are 95% effective" so, um, we took it from there . . .
Here's the entire video: https://rumble.com/vwxl1m-cdc-director-dr.-rochelle-walensky-drops-bombshell-admits-covid-vaccines-do.html?mref=6zof&mrefc=9
Thank you for putting this timeline together. How does the billion dollar spend from the CDC to promote these jabs come into play here? Is CNN just reposting plagiarized Pfizer press releases from the CDC? Is Pfizer the CDC?
Side note, I thought Fauci disappeared because he became a pariah for the admin. But I think it’s more like the CDC has run out of its advertising budget. Thoughts?
Very interesting.
And these quotes--
>>An independent group has been keeping an eye on results and side-effects. "To date, the Data Monitoring Committee for the study has not reported any serious safety concerns related to the vaccine," the companies said.<<
>>To date, the Data Monitoring Committee for the study has not reported any serious safety concerns related to the vaccine. <<
How convenient. And it makes for such a tidy press release too!
I find this so strange. When the vaccines were fast-tracked, I thought I read that that safety -- as in risk analysis particularly -- were waved? Is this the Committee that waved that? Or was it Walensky, the FDA? I wish there was a list-form timeline somewhere to keep this stuff straight! And that aside, who was on this Committee? They did a lousy job. Did none of them think to point out that the data did not really reflect 95% effective? Or to come forward and point out details to Walensky for the sake of the nation's well-being? Or did Pfizer put together a rubberstamp committee?
I like your article because it brings up more questions in my head. That's a thought-provoking article that does that....Thank you.
Pppppfyzler and theose other big Harmaceuticals will need the money they have to spend on hacksxxxine injured and a payout to all of us who survive their viruganda
They Harmaceuticals are basically done destroyed womanity and must cease and desist