• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Corona Virus News & Info

edsl48

Midas Member
Midas Member
Survivor
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
3,985
Reaction score
8,935

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
12,782
Reaction score
30,186
Location
North Carolina
There is a lot of ado regarding Kennedy's book on Fauchi that relates to this. I think the book has been banned at certain book sellers. I didn't post this but I came across this at another website that offers no cost downloads.

I just got it from audible but haven’t started. I’m looking forward to it after listening to the 1.5 hour in depth interview someone posted.

I remember way back when Kennedy went on the OReilly factor - I used to think he was a nut. Maybe I was too young to listen and think about some of what he said. I’m not going to wake up a liberal tomorrow but there is Venn diagram overlap in the “don’t trust powerful people or governments” realm.
 

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
70,011
Reaction score
156,863
Location
Rocky Mountains
Screen Shot 2021-12-26 at 11.44.57 AM.png
 

Oldmansmith

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,387
Reaction score
7,472
Location
Taxachusetts
There is a lot of ado regarding Kennedy's book on Fauchi that relates to this. I think the book has been banned at certain book sellers. I didn't post this but I came across this at another website that offers no cost downloads.

I got it for Christmas from Mrs Old, only part way through. Most of the people who need to read it probably won't.
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,901
Reaction score
35,263

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Eagle
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
12,782
Reaction score
30,186
Location
North Carolina

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,901
Reaction score
35,263

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
70,011
Reaction score
156,863
Location
Rocky Mountains
Screen Shot 2021-12-26 at 6.16.12 PM.png
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
17,554
Reaction score
102,339
Location
third cove on the right

the_shootist

Checked out! Good luck!
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
79,170
Reaction score
179,002
Doctors who 'assume' kill hundreds of thousands of patients every year caused by misdiagnoses. It's what they do! These people are witch doctors who have a hair across their asses. Not a good recipe for public safety
 
Last edited:

BigJim#1-8

Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,754
Reaction score
28,921
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,901
Reaction score
35,263

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
9,702
Reaction score
18,076
Who is He ?
What is he?
Where is He ?
Who was he giving this address too ?
Right? I watched the entire thing and found it fascinating...but I was left wondering the same. BTW a book mentioned in the video(Emerging Viruses by Leonard G Horowitz) is available on amazon right now! ...for $121.83.

Patreon + Red Pill(publisher) + a stupid video title all makes it a chore to locate data on. Also, amusingly, if you try to link to the video on faceplant it's blocked as "spam". Shocking.

1640626790779.png
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
17,554
Reaction score
102,339
Location
third cove on the right
Who is He ?
What is he?
Where is He ?
Who was he giving this address too ?


Dr Michael Mcdowell

That is all I can find...

probably for a reason
 

the_shootist

Checked out! Good luck!
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
79,170
Reaction score
179,002
Dr Michael Mcdowell

That is all I can find...

probably for a reason

 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
9,702
Reaction score
18,076
Ah. TY.


 

Irons

Outlaw Prospector
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
29,355
Reaction score
58,109
"And for my next trick I will transmit a disease I don't have to somebody who's been immunized against it."

~ Joe Dan Gorman


.
 

Irons

Outlaw Prospector
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
29,355
Reaction score
58,109

British Government Sending Door-to-Door Compliance Teams to Homes of Unvaccinated or Unboosted​


December 26, 2021 | Sundance | 250 Comments

They know if you’ve been sleeping…
They know if you’re awake…
They know if you’ve been vaxxed or not,

So get vaxxed or meet the state.

Yes, the British people are about to discover how non-private their medical history actually is. U.K. authorities discussing ways to send vaccination and booster compliance squads to the homes of the unvaccinated.

biden-door-to-door-1.jpg


(UK Daily Mail) – Door-to-door teams armed with Covid jabs will be sent to the homes of unvaccinated Britons in plans being considered by Ministers to reach the estimated five million people yet to be inoculated.


Discussions between the Department of Health, NHS England and No 10 over the past week have looked at a nationwide drive to send vaccine teams to areas with low uptake rates as a crucial way to avoid lockdown and other restrictions.

It is also seen as a way to get jabs to rural areas or households where people cannot easily get to a vaccination centre.
(read more)


boris-johnson-phone-vaccination-compliance.jpg

Posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Coronavirus, Fabian Socialists - Modern Progressives, media bias, Medical Tyranny, propaganda, Uncategorized, United Kingdom (UK) and Great Britain, Vaccine Mandate
 

SongSungAU

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
13,865
Reaction score
30,424

Vlad The Impaler

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
3,351
Reaction score
3,183
Like a junkie hooked on a drug you will beg for your booster shots.

 

Uglytruth

Mother Lode Found
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
22,368
Reaction score
56,065


non veni pacem
The Splendor of Truth

Remember that time Merck cancelled its vaccine program and dumped all its research budget into a pill to cure covid? Now approved in the U.S.​

Posted onDECEMBER 23, 2021
U.S. approves Merck covid pill: https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2021/12/23/u-s-approves-2nd-covid-pill-from-merck/
Remember back when they quit the vaxx? Why would they quit the vaxx, with billions at stake? What did they know, and when did they know it? I mean, Merck had already donated distributed four billion doses of IVM, so they certainly knew how safe it was, but off-patent, so no profits. But it seems they also had knowledge of VEI and ADE all the way back in January, otherwise, why pour millions into research against a disease that was about to be eradicated by the just-released Pfizer and Moderna jabs? Why would you bet on mountains of severe covid cases well into the future, if the “vaccines” were safe and effective?

Hmmm… Why would Merck be canceling its own vaccine and pouring all their money into experimental drugs to treat future severe corona patients?​

Originally posted on JANUARY 30, 2021
Merck will now focus instead on two therapeutic drugs, termed MK-7110 and MK-4482. MK-7110 allegedly has a “greater than 50 percent reduction in the risk of death or respiratory failure in patients hospitalized with moderate to severe COVID-19,” although full results are not yet published. The company is to receive around $356 million from the U.S. government as part of Operation Warp Speed in order to manufacture 60,000-100,000 doses of the two drugs until June 30, 2021. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/m...tter-immunity-found-through-natural-infection
I mean, if the other vaccines work (Pfizer/Moderna), why would anyone be anticipating a surge in severe patient outcomes this summer? Doesn’t that seem counterintuitive? Why would a company place all their focus on treatment drugs for a disease that is about to be wiped out? What did Merck learn during their own vaccine trials that led them to make the switch, storming toward the betting window like Doyle Lonnegan when he found out Lucky Dan was going to run second…
This. Is. Why. I stumbled across the following last summer, when President Trump was promising a vaccine before the election. If you want to understand how and why all previous attempts at a coronavirus vaccine have failed, and failed spectacularly, read this. The vaccines have a history in causing a supercharged adverse reaction… not when injected, but down the road when the subject encounters the wild virus. It’s not just that the vaccines don’t work, it’s that they cause harm. One of the key terms you will want to research is antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).

Would you be surprised to learn that coronavirus vaccines have a tendency to kill the patient?​

Originally posted on JULY 24, 2020
Imagine my shock to learn that there is a significant risk of worsened illness or higher mortality for vaccines for several past strains of coronavirus, including RSV, SARS, and feline coronavirus. The vaccines end up enhancing the infection by increasing the body’s uptake of the pathogen. It’s almost as if they picked a coronavirus on purpose. The following article is three nine months old, so bear that in mind, but all of the facts remain relevant. Full annotation at the source link.

SOURCE HERE
As they race to devise a vaccine, researchers are trying to ensure that their candidates don’t spur a counterproductive, even dangerous, immune system reaction known as immune enhancement.
The teams of researchers scrambling to develop a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine clearly face some big challenges, both scientific and logistical. One of the most pressing: understanding how the immune system interacts not only with the pathogen but with the vaccine itself—crucial insights when attempting to develop a safe and effective vaccine.
Researchers need to understand in particular whether the vaccine causes the same types of immune system malfunctions that have been observed in past vaccine development. Since the 1960s, tests of vaccine candidates for diseases such as dengue, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) have shown a paradoxical phenomenon: Some animals or people who received the vaccine and were later exposed to the virus developed more severe disease than those who had not been vaccinated (1). The vaccine-primed immune system, in certain cases, seemed to launch a shoddy response to the natural infection. “That is something we want to avoid,” says Kanta Subbarao, director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza in Melbourne, Australia.
This immune backfiring, or so-called immune enhancement, may manifest in different ways such as antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), a process in which a virus leverages antibodies to aid infection; or cell-based enhancement, a category that includes allergic inflammation caused by Th2 immunopathology. In some cases, the enhancement processes might overlap. Scientific debate is underway as to which, if any, of these phenomena—for which exact mechanisms remain unclear—could be at play with the novel coronavirus and just how they might affect the success of vaccine candidates.
Some researchers argue that although ADE has received the most attention to date, it is less likely than the other immune enhancement pathways to cause a dysregulated response to COVID-19, given what is known about the epidemiology of the virus and its behavior in the human body. “There is the potential for ADE, but the bigger problem is probably Th2 immunopathology,” says Ralph Baric, an epidemiologist and expert in coronaviruses—named for the crown-shaped spike they use to enter human cells—at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In previous studies of SARS, aged mice were found to have particularly high risks of life-threatening Th2 immunopathology (2). Baric expresses his concern about what that might mean for use of a COVID-19 vaccine in elderly people. “Of course, the elderly are our most vulnerable population,” he adds.
Experts generally agree that animal experiments and human clinical trials of candidate vaccines for COVID-19, which is caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), should include a careful assessment of possible immune complications before releasing the vaccine to the public. If any of the mechanisms under investigation are indeed involved, they say, the resulting risks are real. “You really have to test a vaccine carefully,” says Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health in Boston, MA, “and not just roll it out because people are clamoring for it with an epidemic underway.”
Upwards of 80% of patients who contract COVID-19 develop only mild flu-like symptoms. “The immune system fights off the virus and people might hardly notice,” says Darrell Ricke, a researcher with the MIT Lincoln Laboratory’s Bioengineering Systems and Technologies Group in Lexington, MA, who posted a preprint in March on the possible COVID-19 vaccine risks (3). “But there seems to be a tipping point: Some individuals appear equally healthy yet can progress to a more severe disease.”
Ricke points to ADE as a potential explanation for this variability. The phenomenon has been reported in some tissue culture and animal studies of HIV, influenza, and SARS. But it is best known for its influence on the immune response to the dengue virus. If a person is infected with one of dengue’s four serotypes, their immune system should confer lifelong protection against that serotype. But as researchers have discovered, if that person is later infected by a different dengue serotype, then they can develop a severe and potentially deadly illness. In fact, according to one study in the 1980s, more severe responses were found to be 15 to 80 times more likely in secondary dengue infections than in primary infections (4). Instead of the antibodies neutralizing encountered dengue viral proteins, they enhance uptake of the virus. The back end of the antibody binds to macrophages, a type of white blood cell, and helps the virus enter those cells and accelerate viral replication.

ADE has posed a similar challenge in the creation of vaccines for infections including dengue and a cat coronavirus, feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV). In one study, cats vaccinated against FIPV got sicker than cats left unvaccinated (5). Again, the virus-specific antibody increased the virus uptake by macrophages.


Barney Graham, deputy director of the Vaccine Research Center at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in Bethesda, MD, which is collaborating with the Cambridge, MA-based biotech Moderna on a COVID-19 vaccine candidate, also questioned the role of ADE… Graham emphasizes alternative ways in which a vaccine could potentially induce more serious COVID-19 infections: Th2 immunopathology, in which a faulty T cell response triggers allergic inflammation, and poorly functional antibodies that form immune complexes, activating the complement system and potentially damaging the airways.
Both processes were at play as an unfortunate situation unfolded in the 1960s, according to Graham. Researchers at the time were pursuing a vaccine against RSV, the leading cause of severe respiratory illness in infants. In trials of one vaccine candidate, several children who received the vaccine developed a serious illness when infected with the natural virus (7). Two toddlers died. In this case, researchers noticed severe damage and the unexpected presence of lots of neutrophils and eosinophils, both immune cells, in the children’s lung tissue. A similar inflammatory response was seen in animal models of RSV, in which cytokines, a type of immune cell, had invaded and damaged tissue.

“That really killed RSV vaccines for a generation,” says Peter Hotez, a vaccine researcher and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, TX. After more than 50 years of further study, a candidate RSV vaccine is finally back in clinical trials.

When SARS, also a coronavirus, appeared in China and spread globally nearly two decades ago, Hotez was among researchers who began investigating a potential vaccine. In early tests of his candidate, he witnessed how immune cells of vaccinated animals attacked lung tissue, in much the same way that the RSV vaccine had resulted in immune cells attacking kids’ lungs.

Moderna’s mRNA vaccine candidate has progressed at unprecedented speed, thanks in large part to China’s January release of the genetic sequence of the virus. A phase 1 clinical trial began on March 16 in Seattle, WA. “We need to get some answers by next winter so we can at least be more prepared for the winter of 2021–2022,” adds Graham.
But immune enhancement concerns linger. Stanley Perlman, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the University of Iowa in Iowa City, agrees that a good T cell response should sidestep enhancement concerns. He is also part of a special committee convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address immune enhancement, which they refer to as vaccine enhancement. The committee now aims to define what exactly this enhancement means, what the relevant issues are for a COVID-19 vaccine, and what to do with that information, notes Perlman. A subgroup of the committee is expected to produce a summary report within a few months.

Vaccine experts have underscored the need to avoid mistakes from the past, such as the halting of SARS vaccine development. More coronaviruses are likely waiting in wild bats, primates, and rodents, ready to make the jump to humans. “Ecological disruption really increases the odds that we might encounter a pathogen that we’ve never seen before but grows in us just fine,” says Rasmussen.
 

Uglytruth

Mother Lode Found
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
22,368
Reaction score
56,065

How To Make Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) At Home | Home Recipe For Hydroxychloroquine (Quinine Version)​


 

dacrunch

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
10,637
Reaction score
17,245

How To Make Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) At Home | Home Recipe For Hydroxychloroquine (Quinine Version)​



I call BS....

just PERHAPS a product SIMILAR to QUININE, but DEFINITELY NOT the formula of HCQ "Hydroxy" (oxygen peroxide) "Chloro" (chlorine) "Quine" (quinine)... imho...

I'd wager that TONIC WATER contains more quinine than this "home brew"...
 

the_shootist

Checked out! Good luck!
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
79,170
Reaction score
179,002

SongSungAU

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
13,865
Reaction score
30,424
Busted! The Great Fauci/NIH Anti-Science Conspiracy! (32 min 50 sec):


Published on Dec 20, 2021 by RonPaulLibertyReport​
 

edsl48

Midas Member
Midas Member
Survivor
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
3,985
Reaction score
8,935

Has Dr. Fauci Learned His Lesson?​

Dr. Fauci's Dance With Nature
tippinsights Editorial Board29.Dec.2021
Way back in 2012, Dr. Fauci was a visionary championing risky research. Some call him the Godfather of gain-of-function research. He penned an article in mBio, the American Society for Microbiology journal, titled "Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward."
Here's Dr. Fauci: The issue that has been intensely debated is whether knowledge obtained from these experiments could inadvertently affect public health in an adverse way, even in nations multiple time zones away. Putting aside the specter of bioterrorism for the moment, consider this hypothetical scenario: an important gain-of-function experiment involving a virus with serious pandemic potential is performed in a well-regulated, world-class laboratory by experienced investigators, but the information from the experiment is then used by another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and is not subject to the same regulations. In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario—however remote—should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?
He goes on to write: Scientists working in this field might say - as indeed I have said - that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks. It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature, and the need to stay ahead of such a threat is a primary reason for performing an experiment that might appear to be risky. However, we must respect that there are genuine and legitimate concerns about this type of research, both domestically and globally. We cannot expect those who have these concerns to simply take us, the scientific community, at our word that the benefits of this work outweigh the risks, nor can we ignore their calls for greater transparency, their concerns about conflicts of interest, and their efforts to engage in a dialog about whether these experiments should have been performed in the first place. Those of us in the scientific community who believe in the merits of this work have the responsibility to address these concerns thoughtfully and respectfully.
But, Dr. Fauci's recent public interactions are neither thoughtful nor respectful. He is on the defensive and gets flustered at the mere mention of 'gain-of-function,' for much has happened in the intervening years.
In 2011, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity put off publishing two studies involving modified H5N1 for fear that the know-how would fall into the wrong hands. A couple of years later, in 2014, it was revealed that personnel at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) might have been unintentionally exposed to anthrax. Another incident was reported in which vials of smallpox virus had been left unattended in an NIH storeroom. The news that the CDC had accidentally sent out samples of influenza virus contaminated with H5N1 raised more alarm.
The accidents mentioned above could have had terrible consequences. Fearing that lab-created enhanced viruses could fall into the hands of rogue individuals or groups, a group of 200 scientists signed the Cambridge Working Group declaration calling for an end to experiments creating potential pandemic pathogens. The gravity of the situation prompted the U.S. administration to impose a moratorium on gain-of-function research.
Once the ban on such research was announced in October 2014, the NIH declared that it "will be effective until a robust and broad deliberative process is completed that results in the adoption of a new U.S. Government gain-of-function research policy."
The federal ban on gain-of-function research stayed in effect until December 2017. A new framework was put in place for assessing funding decisions, to be done on a case-by-case basis by a multidisciplinary review board at HHS. The board is expected to explore whether "less risky approaches to tackle the same question" are available in each instance.
When the United States lifted its ban, Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts, told Nature magazine that gain-of-function studies "have done almost nothing to improve our preparedness for pandemics — yet they risked creating an accidental pandemic."
The high risks and potential threat of a pandemic were just that—a hypothetical scenario or a mere possibility—until 2020. Today, the world is reeling from an unprecedented pandemic that could have started with an accidental leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
Genomic analysis of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, shows that it has a bat virus backbone with a Pangolin virus spiked protein. The furin cleavage site in the spike protein of SARS‐CoV‐2 gives the virus the ability to cross species and tissue barriers but was previously unseen in other SARS‐like CoVs. Eleven labs worldwide, including WIV, have engineered a furin site to make a virus more infectious.
Some intelligence professionals believe the Chinese military used the WIV to further its interests. Adding to the suspicion, the French who helped set up the WIV lab were excluded from the lab by the end of 2014. The WIV's virus database was erased shortly before the pandemic was declared.
It has now come to light that the U.S. funded some research at WIV through Dr. Peter Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance. Dr. Fauci defended the move, saying, "This is a sub-award from a larger grant that received one of the highest scores from American peer reviewers for research that needed to be done. So, you say, why do it in China? You do it in China through a very well-known, highly qualified laboratory." This "well-known, highly qualified laboratory," WIV, has been actively thwarting the international community's efforts to get to the origins of the pandemic.
Further, Dr. Fauci said, "So you don't want to go to Hoboken, NJ or Fairfax, VA to be studying the bat-human interface that might lead to an outbreak. So you go to China." And the outbreak in China has now infected every corner of the world.
The key question here is where Dr. Fauci stands on gain-of-function research now. As the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Chief Medical Advisor to the President of the United States, his opinion will strongly influence national policy.
It is abundantly evident that sending dangerous experiments across the oceans is not enough protection for Americans. A decade ago, Dr. Fauci wrote: "Those of us in the scientific community who believe in the merits of this work have the responsibility to address these concerns thoughtfully and respectfully."
Here are a few questions for Dr. Fauci.
  • In light of recent events, do you still believe that gain-of-function studies outweigh the risks?
  • What were the deliberations when the ban was lifted in 2017? Who were the scientists involved in the decision-making? Did the Trump White House authorize the reversal? And if yes, who authorized it?
  • Is such research allowed or banned in the U.S. now?
  • Why did you not disclose the possibility of the lab leak theory to the American public or the Trump White House even though you knew it was a possibility?
 

the_shootist

Checked out! Good luck!
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
79,170
Reaction score
179,002

Has Dr. Fauci Learned His Lesson?​

Dr. Fauci's Dance With Nature
tippinsights Editorial Board29.Dec.2021
Way back in 2012, Dr. Fauci was a visionary championing risky research. Some call him the Godfather of gain-of-function research. He penned an article in mBio, the American Society for Microbiology journal, titled "Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward."
Here's Dr. Fauci: The issue that has been intensely debated is whether knowledge obtained from these experiments could inadvertently affect public health in an adverse way, even in nations multiple time zones away. Putting aside the specter of bioterrorism for the moment, consider this hypothetical scenario: an important gain-of-function experiment involving a virus with serious pandemic potential is performed in a well-regulated, world-class laboratory by experienced investigators, but the information from the experiment is then used by another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and is not subject to the same regulations. In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario—however remote—should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?
He goes on to write: Scientists working in this field might say - as indeed I have said - that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks. It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature, and the need to stay ahead of such a threat is a primary reason for performing an experiment that might appear to be risky. However, we must respect that there are genuine and legitimate concerns about this type of research, both domestically and globally. We cannot expect those who have these concerns to simply take us, the scientific community, at our word that the benefits of this work outweigh the risks, nor can we ignore their calls for greater transparency, their concerns about conflicts of interest, and their efforts to engage in a dialog about whether these experiments should have been performed in the first place. Those of us in the scientific community who believe in the merits of this work have the responsibility to address these concerns thoughtfully and respectfully.
But, Dr. Fauci's recent public interactions are neither thoughtful nor respectful. He is on the defensive and gets flustered at the mere mention of 'gain-of-function,' for much has happened in the intervening years.
In 2011, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity put off publishing two studies involving modified H5N1 for fear that the know-how would fall into the wrong hands. A couple of years later, in 2014, it was revealed that personnel at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) might have been unintentionally exposed to anthrax. Another incident was reported in which vials of smallpox virus had been left unattended in an NIH storeroom. The news that the CDC had accidentally sent out samples of influenza virus contaminated with H5N1 raised more alarm.
The accidents mentioned above could have had terrible consequences. Fearing that lab-created enhanced viruses could fall into the hands of rogue individuals or groups, a group of 200 scientists signed the Cambridge Working Group declaration calling for an end to experiments creating potential pandemic pathogens. The gravity of the situation prompted the U.S. administration to impose a moratorium on gain-of-function research.
Once the ban on such research was announced in October 2014, the NIH declared that it "will be effective until a robust and broad deliberative process is completed that results in the adoption of a new U.S. Government gain-of-function research policy."
The federal ban on gain-of-function research stayed in effect until December 2017. A new framework was put in place for assessing funding decisions, to be done on a case-by-case basis by a multidisciplinary review board at HHS. The board is expected to explore whether "less risky approaches to tackle the same question" are available in each instance.
When the United States lifted its ban, Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts, told Nature magazine that gain-of-function studies "have done almost nothing to improve our preparedness for pandemics — yet they risked creating an accidental pandemic."
The high risks and potential threat of a pandemic were just that—a hypothetical scenario or a mere possibility—until 2020. Today, the world is reeling from an unprecedented pandemic that could have started with an accidental leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
Genomic analysis of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, shows that it has a bat virus backbone with a Pangolin virus spiked protein. The furin cleavage site in the spike protein of SARS‐CoV‐2 gives the virus the ability to cross species and tissue barriers but was previously unseen in other SARS‐like CoVs. Eleven labs worldwide, including WIV, have engineered a furin site to make a virus more infectious.
Some intelligence professionals believe the Chinese military used the WIV to further its interests. Adding to the suspicion, the French who helped set up the WIV lab were excluded from the lab by the end of 2014. The WIV's virus database was erased shortly before the pandemic was declared.
It has now come to light that the U.S. funded some research at WIV through Dr. Peter Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance. Dr. Fauci defended the move, saying, "This is a sub-award from a larger grant that received one of the highest scores from American peer reviewers for research that needed to be done. So, you say, why do it in China? You do it in China through a very well-known, highly qualified laboratory." This "well-known, highly qualified laboratory," WIV, has been actively thwarting the international community's efforts to get to the origins of the pandemic.
Further, Dr. Fauci said, "So you don't want to go to Hoboken, NJ or Fairfax, VA to be studying the bat-human interface that might lead to an outbreak. So you go to China." And the outbreak in China has now infected every corner of the world.
The key question here is where Dr. Fauci stands on gain-of-function research now. As the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Chief Medical Advisor to the President of the United States, his opinion will strongly influence national policy.
It is abundantly evident that sending dangerous experiments across the oceans is not enough protection for Americans. A decade ago, Dr. Fauci wrote: "Those of us in the scientific community who believe in the merits of this work have the responsibility to address these concerns thoughtfully and respectfully."
Here are a few questions for Dr. Fauci.
  • In light of recent events, do you still believe that gain-of-function studies outweigh the risks?
  • What were the deliberations when the ban was lifted in 2017? Who were the scientists involved in the decision-making? Did the Trump White House authorize the reversal? And if yes, who authorized it?
  • Is such research allowed or banned in the U.S. now?
  • Why did you not disclose the possibility of the lab leak theory to the American public or the Trump White House even though you knew it was a possibility?
He's only got one lesson to learn:

swinging noose.gif
 

Irons

Outlaw Prospector
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
29,355
Reaction score
58,109

Why Has New York City COVID Hospitalizations Spiked Amid 90 Percent Vaccinated Population?​

By Alicia Powe
Published December 27, 2021 at 6:00pm
863 Comments

Despite an overwhelming majority of New York residents being fully vaccinated, hospitals in the state are reportedly filled with Covid infected patients and an increasing number of those admitted with the virus are children.

During a remote press briefing from City Hall on Monday, outgoing New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio claimed there were 17,343 new Covid-positive test results in the city, of which 296 were hospitalized.
Statewide, hospitalizations surged by 11 percent in just one day, from 4,891 on Christmas to 5,526 on Sunday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said Monday.


.https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/new-york-covid-hospitalizations-spiked-amid-90-percent-vaccinated-population/
 

SongSungAU

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
13,865
Reaction score
30,424

the_shootist

Checked out! Good luck!
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
79,170
Reaction score
179,002
Fights COVID Like Hydroxychloroquine, yet Easier to Find

Quercetin is the key to opening the cells up to access of zinc to stop virus replication

It's only part of the overall protocol defined here in a number of threads. I take it every day along with D3, zinc and magnesium
 

lukdiver

Silver Miner
Seeker
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
3,136
Dr. Zelenko early-on with this shit-show was using HCQ. Had to switch to quercetin after Gov.(kill'em) Cuamo outlawed it. He's treated thousands. Ivermectin/HCQ are the 'gun' and quercetin too, zinc is the 'bullet' from Dr. Zelenko. He also calls for EGCG, epigallocatechin-gallate, as a zinc ionophore.
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,705
Reaction score
13,199
BigPharma companies are – like all business entities – about increasing profits. As German Member of EU Parliament Christine Anderson recently said,

“pharmaceutical companies are about as interested in public health as the arms industry is in world peace.”

Our good health is bad for their bottom line.

 

SongSungAU

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
13,865
Reaction score
30,424
VAX Nation - New Intellectual Froglegs (35 min 17 sec)

JoeDanGorman Published December 26, 2021​