Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

The Cleveland Clinic study titled, Effectiveness of the Influenza Vaccine During the 2024-2025 Respiratory Viral Season, was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server:

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine during the 2024-2025 respiratory viral season.

Methods Employees of Cleveland Clinic in employment in Ohio on October 1, 2024, were included. The cumulative incidence of influenza among those in the vaccinated and unvaccinated states was compared over the following 25 weeks. Protection provided by vaccination (analyzed as a time-dependent covariate) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results Among 53402 employees, 43857 (82.1%) had received the influenza vaccine by the end of the study. Influenza occurred in 1079 (2.02%) during the study. The cumulative incidence of influenza was similar for the vaccinated and unvaccinated states early, but over the course of the study the cumulative incidence of influenza increased more rapidly among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. In an analysis adjusted for age, sex, clinical nursing job, and employment location, the risk of influenza was significantly higher for the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated state (HR, 1.27; 95% C.I., 1.07 – 1.51; P = 0.007), yielding a calculated vaccine effectiveness of −26.9% (95% C.I., −55.0 to −6.6%).

Conclusions This study found that influenza vaccination of working-aged adults was associated with a higher risk of influenza during the 2024-2025 respiratory viral season, suggesting that the vaccine has not been effective in preventing influenza this season.

This study analyzed over 53,000 Cleveland Clinic employees and found that those who received the influenza vaccine during the 2024–2025 season were statistically more likely to contract influenza compared to those who remained unvaccinated. After adjusting for key factors like age, sex, job role, and location, the data showed a 27% higher risk of influenza among the vaccinated group (Hazard Ratio = 1.27). This led to a negative vaccine effectiveness estimate of −26.9%.

Americans are tired of toxin-loaded injectable products that completely fail and deteriorate their health. Thankfully, the new HHS administration pulled the CDC “Wild to Mild” flu vaccine campaign a few months ago.

[…]

Via https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/new-study-flu-vaccination-linked

By Baxter Dmitry

Terry Adirim, a senior CIA official and ex-Biden defense appointee, was fired last week for her role in pushing Biden’s controversial military Covid-19 vaccine mandate—a mandate that may have crossed legal lines.

Once the acting assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, Adirim jumped ship to the CIA in December, serving as director of its Centers for Global Health Services until her firing.

According to reports, Adirim’s firing is tied to her role in strong-arming troops to take an Emergency Use Authorized jab or face expulsion.

On September 14, 2021, about a month after then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered the vaccine mandate, Adirim issued a memo instructing DOD health care providers to consider the vaccine available to service members — Pfizer’s BioNTech vaccine — as “interchangeable” with a vaccine that was approved by the FDA, known as Comirnaty.

She wrote:

Per FDA guidance, these two vaccines are ‘interchangeable’ and DoD health care providers should ‘use doses distributed under the EUA to administer the vaccination series as if the doses were the licensed vaccine.’

Consistent with FDA guidance, DoD health care providers will use both the PfizerBioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and the Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine interchangeably for the purpose of vaccinating Service members in accordance with Secretary of Defense Memorandum, ‘Mandatory Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination of Department of Defense Service Members,’ August 24, 2021.

Breitbart report: Her memo was considered legally dubious even inside the Pentagon, as reported in September 2022.

A month after Adirim issued her memo, a senior defense official proposed allowing service members who did not want to take the EUA vaccine to wait for the FDA-approved vaccine before facing punishment for being unvaccinated.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Readiness Policy and Oversight David J. Smith, proposed in a draft memo that would replace Adirim’s memo:

If a Service member, after medical counseling, declines administration of the EUA-manufactured product, DoD health care providers should engage with their logistics chain to secure and administer the [Biologics License Application]-manufactured Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty product prior to any punitive action being taken against the Service member.

Smith’s action memo was addressed to Adirim, with a recommendation for her to sign the draft memo with the proposed change.

According to the documents obtained by Breitbart News, the draft memo had been sent to the military services for coordination, and a senior Air Force official objected to it, arguing that adopting the change could open the military up for more litigation and possibly force it to reverse punishments already given for not taking the vaccine.

His response said the proposed change would suggest that DOD considers the EUA-manufactured vaccine different from the FDA-approved Comirnaty product and could open the Air Force up to lawsuits, and that since adverse action had already possibly been taken, “significant remedial actions” would probably be required.

The proposal was never adopted, with legal implications for the DoD.Under 10 U.S.C. Section 1107(a), a defense secretary can order service members to take an FDA-approved vaccine, but he cannot legally order service members to take an EUA-manufactured vaccine without seeking and obtaining a waiver from the president.

Also under 10 U.S.C. Section 1107(a), that waiver must be signed by the president then the defense secretary must formally notify Congress of the waiver. Congress has never received notification of such a waiver.

Austin had pledged in an August 9, 2021, memo to service members that he would seek a presidential waiver, but it is not clear he ever did so. He also pledged that his order would only use the FDA-approved vaccine. Breitbart News questioned the Biden Pentagon if Austin ever sought a presidential waiver to mandate the EUA-manufactured vaccine, but was given the same verbiage that appeared in Adirim’s memo:

Per FDA guidance, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and the Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine had the same formulation and the two vaccines were ‘interchangeable.’ Accordingly, DoD health care providers could ‘use doses distributed under the EUA to administer the vaccination series as if the doses were the licensed vaccine.’

Comirnaty has not been widely available in the U.S. for reasons that are not clear. In July 2022, the FDA reissued its EUA of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, noting, “There is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19.”

The DOD later would be hit with lawsuits from service members suing the DOD for trying to force service members to take the EUA vaccine instead of the FDA-approved vaccine.

One of the lawsuits was led by former Marine Capt. Dale Saran, the military attorney who ended the Pentagon’s anthrax vaccine in 2004. In an interview with Breitbart News in 2022, he called Adirim’s memo a “fraud.” he said:

The undersecretary of defense for health affairs, a woman named Terry Adirim, published a memo claiming that the unlicensed product, BNT162b2 — Pfizer’s unlicensed EUA product — could be substituted in that it was interchangeable with the licensed product. … . That’s the fraud that’s at the heart of our case.

It would not be the first time Adirim would appear to skirt the law.

Adirim left the DOD in 2022 to go to the Department of Veteran Affairs, where she appeared to have violated the Hatch Act, as previously reported by Breitbart News. Just weeks before the 2022 midterm elections, Adirim liked a tweet soliciting donations to Democrats. Doing so is not allowed under the Hatch Act, which seeks to make sure federal employees do not engage in politics while in an official role.

[…]

Via https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/trump-fires-senior-cia-official-responsible-for-illegal-military-covid-vaxx-mandate/

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump. ©  Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images<

By Igor Makarov

They’re messy, risky, and unpopular – but they might be part of a bigger, smarter plan

Let me play devil’s advocate for a minute. I’m not here to defend President Donald Trump’s tariffs. But I do want to push back against the way the conversation around them often unfolds – dismissing them offhand with a smug “well, that’s just dumb,” without any regard for the broader economic context, either at home or globally.

Yes, Trump often shoots from the hip. He lies outright, makes rookie mistakes in his speeches, and fumbles the details. But behind the bluster is a surprisingly coherent strategy – one that wasn’t cobbled together by fools. You don’t have to agree with it to at least try to understand what it is.

I don’t claim to have all the answers (frankly, I’m suspicious of anyone who says they truly understand what’s going on inside Trump’s head), but here’s how I see it.

What you need to know about global imbalances

At their core, global trade imbalances are the result of mismatches between national savings and investment. In countries such as China, Germany, Japan, and major oil exporters, savings tend to outpace domestic investment – capital has to go somewhere, so it flows abroad. This shows up as a trade surplus.

In the US, it’s the reverse. Americans save less than they invest, and the gap is filled by foreign capital. This creates a trade deficit.

1. For decades, export-driven economies (China, Germany, Japan) have followed policies that shift income away from households – which are more likely to spend – toward corporations and the government, which tend to save. This artificially boosts the national savings rate. But since those savings can’t all be invested domestically, the excess capital flows abroad.
2. A lot of it – roughly a trillion dollars a year – ends up in the US. There are two main reasons for this:
   • The American economy is built to encourage consumer spending, not saving.
   • And in times of uncertainty, everyone from investors to governments runs to the dollar – it’s still the world’s safe haven.

Why is that a problem for the US?

In the short term, maybe it doesn’t look like a problem. The US economy remains strong. No one’s sounding alarm bells. But beneath the surface, imbalances are piling up: Persistent trade deficits, ballooning federal debt, and rising interest rates are a dangerous mix. As borrowing becomes more expensive, it gets harder and harder to service that debt.

On top of that, China has slowed its push to boost domestic consumption, and Europe’s economic woes are driving even more capital into the US. This only deepens the imbalance.

Trump knows his political clock is ticking – midterms are around the corner. If he’s going to act, it has to be now.

What are his options?

So how can the US boost savings, shrink the trade deficit, and bring down long-term interest rates? In theory, there are several levers:

• Cut government spending – Trump has pushed for this (just look at the work of DOGE and others).
• Slash corporate taxes and invest in industry – the first increases inequality, and the second is hard to pull off in a polarized political system. Still, both are being pursued, in part through tariffs.
• Limit capital inflows – politically toxic.
• Reduce the dollar’s role as the global reserve currency – difficult to do unilaterally, and potentially destabilizing.
• Impose tariffs – politically the easiest, and the one Trump has clearly chosen.

My guess? Tariffs are just the tip of the spear. The broader plan likely includes pieces of all five approaches.

Legit critiques

Still, the criticisms are real – and in many cases, valid.

First: Why is Trump using a slapdash, anecdotal chart of tariff levels across countries to justify his actions? As Olivier Blanchard quipped, we all run trade deficits with our baker and surpluses with our employer. It’s the same at the international level. Trying to ‘balance’ every bilateral trade relationship is not just naive – it misses the point entirely.

But Trump isn’t necessarily trying to balance trade; he’s trying to negotiate. The US market is so critical to so many countries that Trump seems to be leveraging access to it for concessions. If you’re going to raise tariffs anyway, why not squeeze some extra benefits out of it?

Second: Some warn this could lead to a global crisis. They point to the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which many blame for deepening the Great Depression. But let’s not oversimplify history. Back then, the US had a trade surplus, a consumption shortfall, and rampant overinvestment – tariffs only made things worse. Today, the US has the opposite problem.

That said, we can’t rule out a disaster. It all depends on how the trade war unfolds. I suspect a good chunk of the tariffs will eventually be rolled back as part of negotiated deals. And even if they’re not, the initial pain will fall hardest on surplus countries like China, Germany, Japan, South Korea – and yes, Russia. The US would feel the impact last.

There’s even a real possibility that the US, after triggering a global crisis, could emerge in a stronger position.

But inflation is no joke

The biggest immediate risk is inflation – and maybe even stagflation. Trump argues that domestic production will ramp up to meet demand and keep prices in check. I’m skeptical. Production takes time. Price increases don’t.

And there’s still too much we don’t know:

• How dependent are US companies on foreign components?
• How much of future inflation will be driven by imported parts and materials?
• Will the other parts of the deficit-reduction plan actually happen?
• And how will global deflationary forces – countries dumping excess goods into non-US markets – interact with rising domestic prices?

The bottom line

Trump is gambling – big time. Tariffs are a blunt, inefficient tool. Economists know this. That’s why so many of them are freaking out.

But this isn’t really about tariffs. It’s about trying to reshape the economic model the US – and the world – has operated under for the past 30, even 80 years.

It’s bold. It’s dangerous. I don’t think it’s justified. But it’s not insane.

[…]

Via https://www.rt.com/business/615467-what-if-trumps-tariffs-actually-make-sense/

President Trump announced he is requesting a record-breaking $1 trillion Pentagon budget during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on Monday.

“We also essentially approved a budget, which is in the [vicinity], you’ll like to hear this, of a trillion dollars,” Trump said. “$1 trillion, and nobody’s seen anything like it. We have to build our military, and we’re very cost conscious, but the military is something that we have to build, and we have to be strong, because you got a lot of bad forces out there now.”

“So we’re going to be approving a budget, and I’m proud to say, actually, the biggest one we’ve ever done for the military,” he added.

Two months ago, Trump floated cutting our military budget in half.

“One of the first meetings I want to have is with president Xi of China, president Putin of Russia,” Trump said. “And I want to say, let’s cut our military budget in half.”

The request for a $1 trillion budget came as Trump was meeting with Netanyahu and also as he has been threatening to go to war with Iran.

A week ago, Trump threatened to bomb Iran if they don’t negotiate a new nuclear deal similar to the one he scrapped during his first term to please Israel First GOP megadonor Sheldon Adelson (Pete Hegseth was also funded by Sheldon Adelson when he was younger and ran a pro-Iraq War lobbying group called “Vets for Freedom”).

“If they don’t make a deal,” Trump said, “there will be bombing. It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.”

Trump reiterated the threats on Monday, telling the media: “I think if the talks aren’t successful with Iran, I think Iran is going to be in great danger. And I hate to say, great danger, because they can’t have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump said the US and Iran will hold “direct” talks next Saturday but Iran countered by saying the talks will be “indirect.”

“On the order of its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran has refused to sit down with American officials in direct nuclear negotiations since Mr. Trump pulled out of the last accord,” the NY Times reports. “After Mr. Trump spoke on Monday, however, three Iranian officials said Ayatollah Khamenei had shifted his position to potentially allow direct talks.”

“The officials said that if Saturday’s indirect talks are respectful and productive, then direct talks may happen. The officials asked not to be named because they were not authorized to speak publicly.”

[…]

Via https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=64902

The Ultimate Guide to Methylene Blue

By Mark Sloan

EndAllDiseasePulbishing (2021)

Book Review

PDF link

This book is an encyclopedia about the historical use of a safe, inexpensive, previously common miracle drug now largely replaced by high price pharmaceuticals.

First synthesized from indigo dye in the late 19th century, methylene blue was the very first antimalarial drug, eradicating nearly all forms of malaria in 48 hours. GI’s treated with it during World War II complained bitterly about it turning their urine blue and it was eventually replaced with quinine and quinine derivatives.*

Used intravenously in emergency rooms for carbon dioxide poisoning, methylene blue is also a potent antiviral and can be used orally (as drops) to incapacitate herpes, West Nile virus, hepatitis C, Zika, Ebola and Covid19 (the hydroxychloroquine used to treat Covid 19 is derived from methylene blue). Studies shows it’s also effective against depression, bipolar disorder, Alzheimer’s, Parkinsonism, autism, low back pain and many forms of cancer. It performs better in most of these conditions with the addition of Red Light Therapy.

According to Sloan, treatments (like methylene blue) that target cellular metabolism for repair are the new frontier in medicine. They represent a new understanding by a growing number of practitioners (most outside the Western medical system) that most illness is based on dysfunctional cellular metabolism. Even most genetic mutations result from mitochondrial dysfunction (and impaired metabolism).

Methylene blue primarily acts by neutralizing the free radical nitric oxide. The latter is mainly known for its role in triggering “cytokine storm” an over-the-top immune system reaction leading to excessive clotting, leaky blood vessels and death (the massive bleed-out associated with Ebola infection is a classic example of cytokine storm).

Methylene Blue for Autism

In treating autism, Sloan indicates that separate treatments are necessary alongside the methylene blue to reduce neurotoxic endotoxin production in the gut. Endotoxin is produced by pathogenic gram negative bacteria. These organisms aren’t killed by methylene blue as most is absorbed into the bloodstream before reaching the large intestine. However methylene blue does exert neuroprotective effects (enhanced with Red Light Therapy) against brain endotoxin exposure.

Ways to reduce endotoxin (produced by gram negative bacteria feeding off cellulose and starches):

• cooking vegetables well before eating them
• activated charcoal with every meal (sterilizes the gut)

Methylene Blue for Pain

• chronic neuropathic pain
• arthritic pain
• migraines
• low back pain

Cancer

According to Sloan, cancer doesn’t “invade” people’s bodies as the Western medical system would have us believe. Substantial research evidence indicates cancer is a disease of damaged cellular metabolism. With the proper interventions (eg infusing them with healthy mitochondria), cancer cells can revert back to normal cells and don’t need to be killed or removed.

*As some strains of malaria have become resistance to standard pharmaceutical treatments, there has been a revival in methylene blue research for malaria.

RFK Jr taking methylene blue on a recent flight