No announcement yet.

Negative Effects of Covid Mandates & Policies. Several articles.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Negative Effects of Covid Mandates & Policies. Several articles.

    Let's start with this one.

    People cannot refuel their cars without a Covid certificate.

    Slovenia: Drivers must present COVID certificate in order to refuel cars

    NEWS Author:Hina15.09.2021 17:021 komentar
    Source: Pixabay/Ilustracija
    There were no incidents in Slovenia on the first day of tighter epidemiological restrictions, with some dissatisfaction among unvaccinated citizens, mostly drivers who were unable to refuel their cars without a COVID-19 certificate.

    Most petrol suppliers, including the Ljubljana-based Petrol, which operates the largest number of petrol stations in the country, are rigorously applying the new restrictions, adopted on Saturday, activating fuel dispensers only after a driver presents a certificate showing that they have recovered from COVID-19, have been vaccinated, or have tested negative.

    Employees at petrol stations said that there were no delays on the first day of the new restrictions being in force, with only one incident having been reported in Brezice.

    Drivers in international transport have been exempt from the new restrictions and can still refuel their vehicles without major restrictions but they do have to wear a face mask when paying for the fuel at the petrol station.

    The rule on the compulsory COVID-19 certificate for a number of services and economic activities, applying both to providers of those services and their customers, was introduced due to a worsened epidemiological situation.

    Janez Janza’s government is not ruling out the introduction of additional restrictions if the vaccination rate does not rise quickly and the number of new infections and hospitalisations continues to grow at the current rate.

    Close to 2,800 new infections were reported in the last two days. In the past 24 hours, 1,364 new cases have been reported, with one in five tests being positive.

    Six patients have died of COVID-19, and the number of patients receiving hospital treatment has increased to 347, including 75 in intensive care units. The government is expected to discuss new anti-epidemic rules on Thursday.
    Last edited by Animal; 11-30-2021, 10:26 AM.


    Humans are made to be touched — so what happens when we aren’t?

    Mar 22, 2021 /

    Nadine Redlich
    Our bodies are designed to respond to touch, and not just to sense the environment around us. We actually have a network of dedicated nerve fibers in our skin that detect and emotionally respond to the touch of another person — affirming our relationships, our social connections and even our sense of self.

    So, what happens when we don’t receive that?

    This was one of the first questions that neuroscientist Helena Wasling PhD considered when social distancing restrictions were introduced to curb the spread of COVID-19. Based at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, she has studied these nerves — known as C tactile or CT afferents — and their importance to our emotions for over a decade.

    “What struck me very early on, in the first week of being told that we were restricted from touch, was that people no longer knew how to behave,” she says.

    Even if you don’t consider yourself to be a tactile person, touch is — or was — embedded in the social structure of our lives. From meeting a new colleague and evaluating their handshake to giving a friend a long hug when we haven’t seen them in a while, it is one of the fundamental ways we have all learned to relate to one another. “To take it away is a very big intervention,” says Wasling.

    New York based psychologist Guy Winch PhD agrees; “Touch is something we associate with emotional closeness, and we associate the absence of it with emotional distance. We may not fully appreciate it, but in pre-pandemic life there were literally dozens of small moments of touch throughout the day.”

    This is significant not just in the landscape of our minds, but that of our bodies. Being emotionally and socially responsive to touch is so biologically fundamental to us that CT afferents are present over almost every inch of our skin, absent only from the palms of our hands and the soles of our feet.

    These nerves are, Wasling explains in her TEDxGöteborg talk, particularly attuned to three things: a light touch, gently moving, and around 32 degrees Celsius (89F). Which just happens to be human skin temperature. So they are programmed to be most responsive to a gentle caress from another person.

    Rather than simply telling our brains that this touch has happened — this is the role of other receptors in the skin that help the primary somatosensory cortex to processes physical sensations — CT afferents instead send signals to the insular cortex. “This is a deeper part of the cortex that deals more with your emotional equilibrium,” explains Wasling. “So you will get kind of a vague sensation. In the best of cases, it will be: ‘That was nice. I’m accepted. I feel safer now. Someone is counting on me.’ CT afferents also have pathways to parts of the brain that deal with who you are socially.”

    For people who have now been living without that connection for a long time, it can be incredibly difficult, says Winch. “I have friends and patients that I work with who have not been touched in a year. At all. Not a handshake. And they are really suffering for it. There’s something that feels very distancing and cold about not having any kind of option for an embrace, and that can leave long lasting scars.”
    Hugs, the form of touch we probably all miss the most, are particularly important and emotionally nourishing, says Winch. “When someone’s crying and we hold them, we’re doing it to comfort, but what it allows them to do is cry more. People usually will hold it together until somebody puts an arm around them, and then they’ll break down because that hug represents security and safety, and because of the closeness we feel when we know and trust that person.”

    Moreover, the benefits of touch that we are missing out on are not just emotional and social but also physical; it can reduce pain and stress, as well as giving us a general feeling of wellbeing. These are the areas, says Wasling, where we may be able to support ourselves when we need to go for prolonged periods without social touch.

    Here are some of the ways that we can ease the difficulty of living without this closeness — both for ourselves, and the people in our lives.
    Take a shower or have a warm bath.

    Although it doesn’t elicit quite the same physiological response as interpersonal touch, Wasling says the slow movement of the water on your skin is likely to generate a CT afferent response. Having a warm bath also relaxes your muscles, which can help to alleviate tension.
    Cuddle a pet, or ask to walk someone else’s.

    “Just being close to a furry animal has been shown to lower your stress, reduce your heart rate and your blood pressure,” says Wasling. You also have a social relationship with your pet — they rely on you and need you to show up for them.

    There’s been a noted increase in people adopting pets during the pandemic, and at least one study has identified the potential therapeutic benefits of human-animal relationships when we are denied our normal level of human social interaction.
    If you are able to see anyone in person, be wholly present — even if you can’t touch.

    When we remove touch from our social interactions, we should consider what else we can emphasize instead. “Maybe we could be better at looking each other in the eyes, if we do have physical meetings,” suggests Wasling. “We can make sure that we see each other, because touching a person is a way of saying that ‘I see you, I acknowledge your existence.’”

    Don’t be afraid to have deeper, more meaningful conversations where you really listen — especially if you know someone might be isolated or lonely. While these interactions don’t activate the same touch-based neural pathways, they still stimulate our social sense of belonging and intimacy, says Winch.
    Don’t just “check in” on people who are alone — connect with them meaningfully.

    It feels like everyone from our employers to the Twittersphere to US vice president Kamala Harris is reminding us to check in on our single friends. But are we going the right way about it?

    “When we say ‘check in’ that’s like a checkbox. Tick; done,” says Winch. But that really isn’t enough. While the boredom and frustration of lockdowns are similar experiences for everyone, being isolated from the regular physical closeness of friends and family is uniquely difficult for people who are alone; the elderly, those who live by themselves, and those who are in high risk categories and cannot chance even one hug.

    “If you just check in, that’s not going to be sufficient. You should be talking for at least 15 – 20 minutes for that to be a meaningful conversation. You have to really connect,” says Winch. If you’re both feeling Zoom fatigue, try each taking a walk while you talk on the phone.

    If friends have described feeling ghostly or unreal, do your best to appreciate that the absence of touch has been a significant emotional loss for them during this time. One that you may never fully understand. Try not to say “I know how you feel,” if you are not in the same position.

    “You know that when you touch things, they’re real to you,” says Wasling. “One of the reasons why I think touch is so important is that it makes you convinced you have a place in the social world of other people.”

    As we look towards a vaccinated future, it is difficult to know right now how the pandemic will change our social attitudes towards touch in the long term. Will we still shake hands? Hug colleagues? A UK study conducted from January to March 2020, mostly before lockdown measures were introduced, found that 54 percent of people already felt they had too little touch in their lives. So we may well want this aspect of our lives to return as soon as possible.

    But one facet that worries Winch is how the pandemic has actually reshaped our relationship with touch; “We took the thing that represents something so close, intimate and important, and now it represents something that’s actually dangerous and you should avoid. Even if we don’t fully register it, we are going to feel surges of anxiety at the idea of getting a hug. It’s going to take a while to bring us down from the danger alert of touch.”



      Colorado hospital system announces it will deny organ transplants for unvaccinated patients in 'almost all situations'

      October 06, 2021

      Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images
      Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox.SIGN UP
      COVID-19 immunization status is deciding who gets care in some cases, according to a disturbing report from the Washington Post.
      What are the details?

      UCHealth, a Colorado-based hospital system, is denying organ transplants to unvaccinated patients in "almost all situations."

      "In almost all situations, transplant recipients and living donors at UCHealth are now required to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in addition to meeting other health requirements and receiving additional vaccinations," a spokesperson for UCHealth said in a statement to The Hill.

      UCHealth explained that patients who receive an organ transplant are at "significant risk for COVID-19" and stated that the mortality rate for transplant patients who are infected with the coronavirus is between 18% and 32%.

      "This is why it is essential that both the recipient and the living donor be vaccinated and take other precautions prior to undergoing transplant surgery," the health system's statement explained. "Surgeries may be postponed until patients take all required precautions in order to give them the best chance at positive outcomes."

      Don't miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship. Listen to The Rubin Report now.

      The rules made headlines on Tuesday after Rep. Tim Geitner (R-Colo.) announced that the health system denied a kidney transplant to an area woman because she did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

      In a statement, Geitner called the practice "disgusting."

      He shared a letter that he said the unnamed patient reportedly received last week from the University of Colorado's Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora.

      In its letter, the health system said:
      The transplant team at University of Colorado Hospital has determined that it is necessary to place you inactive on the waiting list. You will be inactivated on the list for non-compliance by not receiving the COVID vaccine. You will have 30 days to begin the vaccination series. If your decision is to refuse COVID vaccination you will be removed from the kidney transplant list. You will continue to accrue waiting time, but you will not receive a kidney offer while listed inactive. Once you complete the COVID vaccination series you will be reactivated on the kidney transplant list pending any other changes in your health condition.

      What else do we know about this?

      The Post report noted that the health system "declined to discuss particular patients" due to federal guidelines.

      The health system on Tuesday, however, confirmed that "nearly all of its transplant recipients and organ donors must get vaccinated against the coronavirus."

      Dan Weaver, a spokesperson for UCHealth, said the health system isn't the only one making such decisions in the United States, and pointed out that certain conditions on meeting the requirements for organ transplants — including smoking cessation and more — are nothing new.

      "An organ transplant is a unique surgery that leads to a lifetime of specialized management to ensure an organ is not rejected, which can lead to serious complications, the need for a subsequent transplant surgery, or even death," Weaver said. "Physicians must consider the short- and long-term health risks for patients as they consider whether to recommend an organ transplant."

      Weaver did not state what might exempt a patient from getting the vaccine.



        Unvaccinated woman delivers ominous message after hospital denies organ transplant over vaccination status: 'My days are numbered'

        October 08, 2021

        Image source: YouTube screenshot
        Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox.SIGN UP
        A Colorado woman who says the UCHealth system denied her organ transplant because she is not vaccinated against COVID-19 says that her "days are numbered."

        Earlier this week, the Colorado health system confirmed it will deny organ transplants for unvaccinated patients in "almost all situations."
        What are the details?

        The woman, Leilani Lutali, told Fox News' Laura Ingraham on Thursday that she has stage 5 renal failure.

        "I believe that my days are numbered as I continue to deteriorate in my GFR numbers," she said.

        Lutali, who appeared alongside donor Jamiee Fougner, added that she reached out to the health system, which that she was "irresponsible in not getting" the COVID-19 vaccine.

        Fougner added, "How can I sit here and allow them to murder my friend when I've got a perfectly good kidney and can save her life?"

        The two met during a Bible study group over the past year. Fougner offered one of her kidneys to Lutali after the two developed a close friendship.

        Don't miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship. Listen to The Rubin Report now.

        "They're holding my kidney hostage and she's going to die because they won't give it to her."

        Fox reported that the health system released a statement on the announcement which read, "For transplant patients who contract COVID-19, the mortality rate ranges from about 20% to more than 30%. This shows the extreme risk that COVID-19 poses to transplant recipients after their surgeries."

        UCHealth previously added, "This is why it is essential that both the recipient and the living donor be vaccinated and take other precautions prior to undergoing transplant surgery. Surgeries may be postponed until patients take all required precautions in order to give them the best chance at positive outcomes."

        In its letter to Lutali, the health system said:
        The transplant team at University of Colorado Hospital has determined that it is necessary to place you inactive on the waiting list. You will be inactivated on the list for non-compliance by not receiving the COVID vaccine. You will have 30 days to begin the vaccination series. If your decision is to refuse COVID vaccination you will be removed from the kidney transplant list. You will continue to accrue waiting time, but you will not receive a kidney offer while listed inactive. Once you complete the COVID vaccination series you will be reactivated on the kidney transplant list pending any other changes in your health condition.

        Ingraham pointed out that she believes the case is a "classic" example of "discrimination."

        [See video in the Article Link, where the patient herself discusses her situation.]




          NOVEMBER 26, 2021 PUBLIUS 2 COMMENTS
          As Bobby Kennedy’s book on Fauci, “The Real Anthony Fauci,” skyrockets to the top of the Amazon charts and scoops up five-star reviews, and as the US media reports that COVID cases are rising, even though half the population is purportedly “vaccinated” and much of the other half has developed natural immunity, Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA delivery system now being used by Pfizer and Moderna, has come out swinging against Anthony Fauci.

          Cases of COVID, since the start of the two weeks to “flatten the curve” last year, are measured by the highly controversial PCR test. (See: FierceBiotech: FDA warns Abbott Alinity PCR COVID test results may only be ‘presumptive’ due to risk of false positives)

          In a fawning interview with NBC’s Ari Melber, Fauci last week said that Tucker Carlson and others who criticize him are “killing people.” Afterwards, Dr. Malone, who did his work on mRNA technology while at the Salks Institute, and who did post-doc work at Harvard Medical School, struck back.

          Dr. Robert Malone:

          “Look Tony, there are over half a million deaths in the United States for this virus, completely unnecessary because the federal government has very actively blocked the ability of physicians to provide lifesaving medications early in the infection. They’ve set a policy where physicians aren’t supposed to be treating as outpatients, they’re only supposed to be treating as inpatients. And you only get admitted when your body is pretty effectively trashed by the virus. And so we have this high rate of dying.”

          The world renown scientist thus lays many future COVID deaths, as long as Fauci’s policies are in place, at the feet of Fauci.

          In an amusing coda to expected attacks on Malone’s credentials, after warning that the mRNA vaccines in their presently untested state were a “danger,” Wikipedia attempted to erase references to his role in inventing the mRNA vaccine platform. But readers found archived Wikipedia pages confirming his role (below.)


          Below: Dr. Robert Malone: ““Look Tony, there are over half a million deaths in the United States for this virus, completely unnecessary…” (View on Bitchute)

          As of the end of November, 67 studies, including 58 randomized control trials and 46 peer-reviewed, showed up to 80% reductions in COVID mortality with the use of Ivermectin under doctor supervision. Dr. Malone’s estimate that 500,000 people’s deaths were “unnecessary” is in line with that number.

          Dr. Malone is one of the 4,200 doctors and scientists who have signed the Fall 2021 “Rome Declaration,” which calls for doctors to have their unfettered traditional, medical judgement-based use of FDA certified drugs for off-label uses. Key among these for COVID are Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which are widely used with reported great success in other countries, such as India, Indonesia, Mexico, many African countries, and now Japan.

          Despite ongoing FDA and media assertions that Ivermectin does not work, and in fact can be dangerous, such assertions never rebut, and simply ignore, overwhelming evidence to the contrary. There is strong evidence that Ivermectin is even effective against all COVID variants, including “Delta.”

          But the most shocking example of evidence being simply ignored as the mantra “no evidence” is repeated, are the multiple studies linked to the FDA’s own webpage on Ivermectin.
          FDA’s Own Cited Studies Show Ivermectin Works, Pandemic Was Manufactured

          The FDA’s own website which says that Ivermectin is not “effective against COVID” links to multiple science which says exactly the opposite.

          The discovery takes place as the newsletter for the Kaiser health system reports an influx of non-COVID patients with “heart conditions” and “blood clots,” which have been associated with the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA injections. Taiwan, Germany, and France have all placed restrictions on the injections for younger age groups.

          Despite warnings that Ivemectin can be dangerous, which is always a result of desperate people not under doctor supervision either taking massive, non-recommended doses, or taking animal versions, the drug has a sterling safety record. A study posted at the NIH website says:

          “Ivermectin has continually proved to be astonishingly safe for human use.”

          Although the links for the individual studies on Ivermectin at the FDA website go only to the study protocols, the studies may be researched by title and the full studies found.

          One must ask if the bureaucrats at FDA and other agencies charged with public health honestly think that Americans cannot read. Media reporters seem not to be able to read, either.

          FDA November 2021 Ivermectin page. (Web archive of FDA Ivermectin page as it appeared on Nov. 11, 2021)

          “Clinical Trials” page link on FDA Ivermectin page (PDF archive of “Clinical Trials” page as it appeared on Nov. 11, 2021)



            More “Covid Suicides” than Covid Deaths in Kids

            More “Covid Suicides” than Covid Deaths in Kids

            Micha Gartz
            March 17, 2021

            Before Covid, an American youth died by suicide every six hours. Suicide is a major public health threat and a leading cause of death for those aged under 25 — one far bigger than Covid. And it is something that we have only made worse as we, led by politicians and ‘the science,’ deprived our youngest members of society — who constitute one-third of the US population — of educational, emotional and social development without their permission or consent for over a year.

            And why? For what?

            We were scared. We were scared for our lives and those of people we love. And, like your average German-on-the-street in the 1930s and 40s, we believed that doing what we were told and supporting the national cause would save us and our families.

            The reality is we sacrificed others without a second thought. We have sacrificed our youths’ lives and future livelihoods in a desperate attempt to save a slim minority of the elderly population who have surpassed the average US life expectancy of 78.8 years and those who were already on their way out.

            Source: Data from “NC-EST2019-SYASEXN: Annual Estimates of the Resident Population by Single Year of Age and Sex for the United States: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019.” 2020 Census.
            The median age — not the average, but the middle — of Covid-deaths is 80. Covid poses minimal risk to healthy individuals under 65, and is even less of a threat to youths (those aged under 25). In fact, preliminary data suggest Covid accounted for barely 1.2% of all deaths in the under-25 age group. Graphically, that’s the solid red line along the bottom of the graph below — the one you would probably miss if I didn’t draw attention to it. The distance between that and the solid pink line across the top that caught your eye? That represents the other 98.8% of deaths that had nothing to do with Covid.
            Source: Data from “Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age, and Week.” CDC 2020. As data is provisional it may not include complete data for the final 8 weeks (the time period with large decline on the graph) and is subject to change.
            A back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that, compared to 2018 and 2019 deaths per 100k, 2020 saw one extra death among those under age five, an additional 1.5 deaths among those aged 5 to 14, and a whopping 23 additional deaths among those aged 15 to 24. Overall, deaths per 100k in this age group jumped from 106.4 per 100k in 2019 to 131.7 per 100k during 2020. That’s an increase of 23% — and Covid only accounts for 1.2% of total deaths in ages 0–24 years.

            All-Cause Deaths per 100,000 of US population under 25 years
            Ages 2018 2019 2020
            1 – 4 Years 24 23.3 24.3
            5 – 14 Years 13.3 13.4 14.9
            15 -24 Years 70.2 69.7 92.5
            Total < 25 107.5 106.4 131.7
            Source: 2018/2019 data from “Mortality in the United States, 2019,” Figure 3: Death rates for ages 1 year and over: United States, 2018 and 2019; and 2020 data drawn from “Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age, and Week.” 2020 data is an estimate based on the CDC’s provisional death count – which may not include complete data for the previous 8 weeks and is subject to change.
            The biggest increase in youth deaths occurred in the 15-24 age bracket — the age group most susceptible to committing suicide, and which constitutes 91% of youth suicides. Indeed, as early as July 2020 — just four months into the pandemic — CDC Director Robert Redfield remarked that
            there has been another cost that we’ve seen, particularly in high schools. We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID. We’re seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose.

            Although complete national suicide data for 2020 likely won’t be publicly available until 2022, Redfield’s claim is supported by the increase in calls and emails witnessed by mental illness hotlines.

            Between March and August the National Alliance on Mental Illness HelpLine reported a 65% increase in calls and emails. The Trevor Project — which targets suicide prevention among LGBTQ youth — saw double its usual call volume. The jump in helpline calls hadn’t let up by the end of 2020: in November Crisis Text Line received 180,000 calls — its highest volume ever, and an increase of 30,000 from the previous month. Over 90% of those were from people under 35.

            Such “deaths of despair” tend to be higher among youths, particularly for those about to graduate or enter the workforce. With economic shrinkage due to lockdowns and forced closures of universities, youths face both less economic opportunity and limited social support — which plays an important role in reporting and preventing self-harm — through social networks. “We know that participation in sports and a connection to school can have a profound protective effect,” says Pittsburgh psychiatry professor David Brent. But “the stressor that COVID represents,” says University of Oregon clinical psychology professor Nick Allen,
            takes away [the] good things [in life]. You can’t go to sporting events, you can’t see your friends, you can’t go to parties. […] we’re taking away high points in people’s lives that give them reward and meaning. […] over time, the anhedonia, the loss of pleasure, is going to drive you down a lot more.

            And, “while adults have had multiple years to practice stress management and build skills around that,” says YouthLine program director, Emily Moser, “young people haven’t had that.” Many of YouthLine’s callers grieved not being able to do things they normally could — from after-school activities, to spending time with friends and missing milestones such as graduations. Many of these mental health problems and suicidal behaviour created by lockdowns, “are likely to be present for longer and peak later than the actual pandemic,” according to University of Bristol suicidology expert David J. Gunnell.

            Generally suicides decrease in the immediate aftermath of short-term local or national emergencies (such as hurricanes) because, as the University of Kentucky’s director of the Suicide Prevention and Exposure Laboratory, Julie Cerel, explained, “[p]eople have [a] pull-together mentality.” However, this effect appears to disintegrate over longer periods of crisis, such as in the aftermath of financial crises. Between 2008 and 2012, in the wake of the financial crisis, suicide was the second (ages 15-19) and third leading cause of youth deaths (ages 10-14 and 20-24).

            In August 2020, FAIR Health found a 334% spike in intentional self-harm claims among 13–18 year olds in the Northeast compared to the same month in 2019. Nationally self-harm medical claim lines nearly doubled for this group in both March and April, while claim lines for overdoses as a percentage of all medical claim lines increased 95% and 119% percent respectively.

            Indeed, during the first eight months of 2020, suicides in Los Alamos (NM) tripled while Fresno (CA) numbers jumped 70% in June 2020 compared to the same month the previous year. Even the CDC acknowledges a 31% increase in the proportion of mental health-related ER visits for 12 to 17 year olds between March and October last year compared to the previous year.

            Suicide is already the 10th leading cause of death in the US, with one death for every 24 attempts. Yet we continue to sacrifice the well-being of 103.3 million youths — equivalent to roughly 31.5% of the US population — out of fear for a fraction of the 4% that live past the average life expectancy of 78.8 years.

            Why are we even attempting to subject the entirety of the US population to isolation and ineffectual mask-wearing, instead of supporting voluntary focused protection for those who actually need it? And why do we continue to deny all groups the opportunity to enjoy and celebrate life when, after one year, deaths from and with Covid — number 520,000 — and are barely equivalent to 0.16% of the population?

            Society needs to remember that the stolen Covid generation will one day run the country. Teachers resisting returning to class should recognize that this generation currently locked-in to bedroom Zoom classes will one day care for us in our old age. And politicians should remember that this generation whose rights have so blatantly been violated will soon be able to vote.


            If you or someone you know needs help, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255



              U.S. Drug Overdose Deaths Spike Amid the Pandemic

              OPIOID CRISIS

              by Felix Richter,
              Nov 18, 2021

              Aside from the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States is also dealing with another national health crisis, one that has been going on for years and is only getting worse. The opioid crisis.

              On Wednesday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released preliminary data showing that U.S. drug overdose deaths surpassed 100,000 for the first time in the twelve months ending April 2021, jumping nearly 40 percent since 2019.

              The pandemic has been identified as a major contributor to the latest surge in overdose deaths. However, experts agree that it only exacerbated a crisis that existed long before COVID-19. While the unique circumstances of the past one and a half years have undoubtedly disrupted outreach and treatment programs while increasing levels of social isolation, the main problem lies in the availability and potency of synthetic opioids like fentanyl. Fentanyl is up to 50 times more potent than heroin and, due to its low price, it is often used to lace other drugs, which makes it especially dangerous. According to the CDC’s latest data, synthetic opioids were involved in more than 60 percent of overdose deaths last year.

              “As we continue to make strides to defeat the COVID-19 pandemic, we cannot overlook this epidemic of loss, which has touched families and communities across the country,” President Biden said in a statement, pledging that his administration will do everything in its power to “turn the tide on this epidemic.”

              Felix Richter
              Data Journalist
     (40) 284 841 557

              This chart shows the number of drug overdose deaths in the U.S. from 2000 to 2021.


                An analysis of each of these three groups support the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.

                While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.




                  An open letter to Christi Grimm, Inspector General of the HHS

                  Without a doubt, there is an enormous amount of corruption at the highest levels of the FDA, CDC, and NIH that needs to be investigated. In particular, they are hiding the safety signals.

                  Apr 4


                  Dear Inspector General Grimm,

                  There is overwhelming evidence of an enormous amount of corruption at the highest levels of the CDC, FDA, and NIH. These activities are aimed at both:
                  1. deliberately suppressing any negative safety and efficacy data about the COVID vaccines
                  2. suppressing safe, effective treatments using widely available repurposed drugs and supplements

                  None of these activities are in the public interest. Collectively, we estimate that they have cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

                  It is also clear these actions were not due to negligence or incompetence. The actions are done by people who know exactly what they are doing. When confronted with evidence, they refuse to talk about it.

                  I’ve listed a few examples below. I would be happy to provide more details upon request on any of these points. I have also filed this as a “Hotline complaint” on the HHS website on April 20, 2022. Unfortunately, there is no “tracking number” issued by the HHS on the complaint.
                  1. The CDC and FDA are deliberately ignoring their own safety data that shows that the vaccines are unsafe. The safety signals that show the vaccines are too dangerous to us have been flashing “red alert” since January 2021 in the VAERS database which is the official database for reporting safety issues. The public was told that this database was being watched “like a hawk” by the FDA and CDC. How can these agencies see absolutely no signals when others including Dr. Jessica Rose and non-experts such as Albert Benavides were seeing huge safety signals as early as January 2021? How can the CDC miss such obvious safety signals such as more than a 1,000-fold increase in the rate of reported pulmonary embolisms? If it wasn’t the vaccines causing this, then we clearly have a new public health emergency. The CDC claims there are no safety signals. They are lying. It is instantly clear they are lying. See The CDC knew in January 2021 that the vaccines were unsafe, but they said NOTHING. This is unacceptable.
                  2. The CDC refuses to acknowledge that there are millions of vaccine injured people in America. The Israeli Ministry of Health did a survey on vaccine injuries and found that 4.5% of people who took the vaccine had neurological issues. I confirmed this same rate of injury with a local physician in my area with over 20,000 patients. Independently, we also know there were hundreds of thousands of vaccine injured people who joined groups on Facebook which Facebook deleted. Why would Facebook find it necessary to remove these groups? And how does the CDC explain the hundreds of thousands of people who joined these groups if the vaccines are safe and effective? The only explanation that fits the data is that the CDC is hiding the fact that the vaccines are unsafe and have injured millions of Americans, many of them permanently.
                  3. More than 10 independent methods estimate that over 150,000 Americans have been killed by the COVID vaccines, yet the CDC says that it hasn’t found a single death due to Pfizer or Moderna. If nobody is dying from the vaccines, how can the CDC and FDA explain the analysis done by Dr. Peter Schirmacher in Germany who is one of the world’s top pathologists? He found that at least 30% to 40% of the deaths within 2 weeks of vaccination were caused by the vaccines. His family is being physically threatened with death if he speaks out about his study. Is this the way science is supposed to work? More troubling is data from embalmers who we have contacted. While some embalmers report a case rate of 40% with telltale blood clots, one embalmer we talked to reported that over 90% of the last 30 cases she embalmed had telltale blood clots that have only been seen in vaccinated people and never seen prior to the COVID vaccines. These clots are not compatible with life. If the vaccines aren’t causing these clots, then what is and why is the CDC saying nothing about the cause of these clots? This should be a national emergency. We have videos of multiple embalmers discovering these clots. None of them have seen these clots prior to the vaccine rollout.
                  4. The CDC is deliberately putting the American public at risk. The vaccine puts anyone operating heavy equipment at significantly increased risk of having a cardiac event that can incapacitate them. Heavy equipment can include a plane, train, bus, truck, and car. Few of the operators of these vehicles will admit to having chest pain because it can mean the end of their careers. So it is covered up. Until an event occurs as we saw with American pilot Bob Snow. Snow is hardly alone. The CDC should be requiring all operators of heavy equipment that can risk public safety to get a troponin blood test and if elevated, a cardiac MRI before being allowed to operate heavy machinery. They aren’t doing that because they know that, for example, this would cause thousands of pilots to lose their jobs. When the American public finds this out, they will never trust the CDC again. So the CDC does nothing and all these events where drivers lose control of their car, truck, train, or plane are simply viewed as unfortunate accidents instead of preventable events.
                  5. Clear clinical trial fraud is deliberately ignored by the FDA. Maddie de Garay was seriously injured in the Pfizer 12-15 year old trial. She couldn’t walk less than 24 hours after the injection. She’s now a paraplegic on her way to becoming a quadriplegic. Pfizer reported her symptoms as mild abdominal pain. FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock promised me via email she would investigate this case. Nobody ever called. This is not something that could be dropped on the floor by mistake. The FDA deliberately refused to investigate. The Pfizer trial results fraudulently report no serious adverse events to this day. If there isn’t corruption, how is this possible? This is a very high profile case. The mainstream media has ignored it as well. The injury happened to a perfectly healthy 12-year old less than 24 hours after vaccination. This can’t be just “bad luck” since the fact pattern is repeated in other vaccine-injured people.
                  6. Embalmer videos. I have videos from multiple embalmers showing the telltale blood clots never before seen before the vaccines rolled out. If the vaccines are safe and effective and doesn’t cause blood clots, what is causing these MASSIVE clots in 40% or more of cases? See this article.
                  7. No cure for the millions of vaccine injured. Not only does the CDC not acknowledge that the vaccines cause injury, they also fail to inform the public that there are no known ways to cure the vaccine injured and restore their health. The FDA has met with the vaccine injured on many occasions. Each time they listen “carefully” and say they will look into it. Nothing ever happens. Why not? They never tell anyone. They clearly know there are many vaccine injured, but will not admit it publicly. They admit nothing to the public about the large number of vaccine injured and their inability to cure these people. That is not in the public interest. This is what informed consent is all about for these experimental products.
                  8. They are ignoring the DMED data. The CDC is supposed to be monitoring the DMED data as well as other databases. The DMED data had safety signals as well that clearly showed the vaccines are unsafe. They were unambiguous. Why was there never any public report alerting the public about this?
                  9. The public is not getting a proper informed consent briefing. The Nuremberg Code requires that the public get informed consent. The public is not advised of the chance of death or disability from these vaccines. The data is available in VAERS. The CDC doesn’t want the public to know. The public also isn’t being told that the FDA hasn’t been able to “cure” a single vaccine injured patient and restore their health.
                  10. The CDC, FDA, and NIH ignore most all email and phone communication attempting to hold them accountable. All attempts to alert responsible individuals at the CDC, the FDA, and their respective outside committees of the safety signals in VAERS were ignored. They simply delete the notifications. See this article as an example.
                  11. Corruption and intimidation inside the CDC. I’ve heard stories from 3 different people that people who work at the CDC are too intimidated to speak out about what is happening there. See for example, CDC Whistleblower Scientist Given Huge Bonus and Asked to Rewrite Fraudulent Vaccine-Autism Study for details.
                  12. Multiple systematic reviews and meta analyses of ivermectin and fluvoxamine are ignored by the NIH. These are the highest level of evidence in evidence-based medicine. This is the standard used by the medical community. How can they be ignored? See for example the April 6 JAMA study on fluvoxamine. We are in an emergency situation and this drug is safe and effective. Why would it not be recommended immediately as soon as that paper was published? Instead the NIH issues a “neutral recommendation” on the drug citing “insufficient evidence.” This is corrupt. You can’t say there is insufficient evidence when there is a peer-reviewed published systematic review and meta-analysis saying the drug works. The NIH recommendation is clearly and objectively corrupt; it isn’t based on science. In fact, an earlier key opinion leader panel more than a year ago recommended fluvoxamine as a patient option when there was far less data than there is now. How is it now that we have overwhelming data on fluvoxamine, we still have a neutral recommendation from the NIH? Why did it take almost a year for the medical journals to publish the notes on the expert panel recommendation? It was rejected by 8 medical journals. The only explanation is corruption. The science is clear. The cost benefit is crystal clear. We don’t know the reason because Cliff Lane refuses to explain this. None of these people will agree to a public discussion. They all want to avoid being held accountable for their decisions by their peers. If there was a hearing on this, they would be unable to defend their position.
                  13. The rate of myocarditis is much higher than the CDC is telling people and they know it. I personally know of at least 4 independent places where the rates of myocarditis are approximately 1 in 100. The CDC claims that myocarditis is rare, but cites the VAERS “reporting rates” which are meaningless. The CDC knows full well it needs to normalize the reporting rate to estimated “incidence rates” but they flatly refuse to do so. They just tell people that VAERS is underreported and make no attempts at all to calculate a best estimate of the underreporting factor (URF). In fact, they have refused to calculate this number. If they did calculate the number based on their own methodology, the number would be in excess of 40 meaning that the incidence rate is 40 times higher than the reporting rate. By deliberately withholding any mention of the URF or how to calculate it using their own methodology, they are giving the public the false impression that events such as myocarditis are significantly more rare than they really are. This is scientific fraud. You can easily verify this with almost any cardiologist. Why are we only seeing extremely high rates of myocarditis in children at high rates AFTER the vaccines rolled out? How can a little private school with 400 boys have 4 cases of myocarditis? And why aren’t any of these schools talking about their rates of vaccine injuries?
                  14. All attempts by dozens of us to find answers to our questions about vaccine safety and efficacy were deflected. If there is an honest explanation for any of these observations for some reason nobody wants to share it with us. Not even for a million dollars. Instead, the White House has directed technology companies to censor us. The behavior is consistent with people who have something to hide.
                  15. Inability to interpret science. A Federal judge lifted the mask mandate, but the CDC says masks are still needed on airplanes so the DOJ is appealing the ruling. But the problem is there are no scientific studies backing this claim. All of the randomized studies on masks and COVID have shown no measurable effect. The latest study (in Finland) showed, if anything, masks made the problem worse. So how can it be urgent to mandate masks? It can’t be. These people who work at the CDC cannot be that incompetent and that out of touch with the science. When that incompetency then causes them to give advice to the public which is opposite that of the best science, this is a problem that needs to be addressed.
                  16. Tony Fauci and the virus origin coverup: If Tony Fauci created SARS-CoV-2, it would be important for people to know that. It appears he funded that research and the virus leaked out of the lab he indirectly funded. There were a series of emails that happened after the virus was released where Fauci asked experts what they thought and then he created a plan to cover up the expert opinion so the public wouldn’t know the virus was man-made. Your office can obtain the unredacted emails which will reveal the cover-up. Why would he do that if he had nothing to do with the virus?
                  17. Early treatments that work are ignored by the NIH: Every single early treatment generic drug that worked against COVID was ignored by the NIH. Nothing was recommended, not a single one. This is a pandemic. People are dying. Why would the NIH not recommend the use of aspirin, vitamin D, fluvoxamine, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc. when the vast majority of published papers showed these drugs were safe and effective? For example, I personally funded the Boulware HCQ trial which claimed that HCQ didn’t work. But that’s not what the study said. The study said there was a positive effect, but the study size was too small to get to statistical significance. And when David Wiseman analyzed the results, he found that the results were statistically significant. We could have avoided hundreds of thousands of deaths if the NIH weren’t instructed to ignore all early treatment drugs and find excuses for not recommending them. The extreme example was the Fareed-Tyson protocol. They treated over 10,000 patients with no deaths, but the NIH ignores that. Why? If the NIH acknowledged these protocols, we can then discard all mitigation strategies as unnecessary. Yet the NIH has no interest in investigating these proven treatment protocols that work. I can understand that if they have a treatment protocol that works with 10,000 patients with no deaths. But they have no such protocol. So why are they ignoring this proven treatment?
                  18. Negative data that is withheld: The CDC admitted to the New York Times that they aren’t disclosing certain data because it might be misused by “misinformation spreaders.” Is that the real reason? Or are they hiding the information because it shows that the vaccines are dangerous or don’t work? For example, the UK government disclosed that triply vaccinated people had a 3 times higher rate of infection than unvaccinated people. When the numbers got even worse over time, they decided not to report the numbers anymore. What data is the CDC hiding and is there a valid reason it is being withheld? Withholding negative data is not in the public interest.
                  19. They aren’t able to explain the VAERS data. While the CDC and FDA refuse to answer any of our questions, they had no trouble responding to Reuters “fact checker.” The Reuters story reveals that they have no credible explanation for the huge number of death reported into the VAERS system. They claim that the greater deaths are due to people just reporting background deaths at a higher rate due to the EUA reporting requirements. But that’s a silly argument since doctors are required by law to report deaths for all vaccines to VAERS, something the “fact check” neglected to point out. So the “requirement” to report has not changed at all. If people are reporting more due to other reasons, e.g., they are more aware of VAERS, they have provided no evidence to support that. The problem the FDA has is that the URF of 41 was calculated using the measured anaphylaxis data, and thus it already takes into account any changes in the underreporting factor this year. The bottom line is that the FDA is unable to provide a credible explanation for all the excess deaths to the mainstream press. This is because they have no credible explanation. They won’t talk to me or any of my colleagues because they know such a discussion will reveal their deception.
                  20. Facilitating the spread of misinformation. The CDC, FDA, and NIH all refuse to have discussions with any person labelled a “misinformation spreader.” But these “misinformation spreaders” are perfectly willing to stop “spreading misinformation” if the HHS agencies can explain the what the so-called “misinformation spreaders” are seeing (such as the points outlined in this memo). They refuse to do that and instead seek to silence dissent rather than explain why they are right and the misinformation spreaders are wrong. Why are all these people so frightened to defend their positions? The answer is simple: the assertions that the vaccines are safe and effective are not defensible.
                  21. NIH Guidelines Panel corruption. There are undisclosed conflicts of interest on the CDC COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines panel. It appears this panel is not assessing the science objectively. Fluvoxamine is a perfect example.

                  Finally, I am happy to clarify and/or elaborate on any of these points. You know how to contact me.