The Most Revolutionary Act

Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine

The Most Revolutionary Act

Author Archives: stuartbramhall

Unknown's avatar

About stuartbramhall

Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist and American expatriate in New Zealand. In 2002, I made the difficult decision to close my 25-year Seattle practice after 15 years of covert FBI harassment. I describe the unrelenting phone harassment, illegal break-ins and six attempts on my life in my 2010 book The Most Revolutionary Act: Memoir of an American Refugee.

Pfizer Hiding How COVID Jab Damages the Heart

Posted on by
1

Dr. Joseph Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • August 3, 2023, the Australian Senate held a COVID hearing. Sen. Gerard Rennick asked Dr. Krishan Thiru, Pfizer’s Australian medical director, to explain the mechanism of how the mRNA COVID shot causes myocarditis. Thiru, however, kept talking in circles rather than answering the question
  • Either Pfizer has no idea how the shot damages the heart, which raises serious questions about the company’s scientific qualifications, or they do know but refuse to admit it, for fear of liability
  • Pfizer appears to have sponsored campaigns to push for the jab to be mandated, at least in the U.S., thereby maximizing the potential damage along with profits
  • According to Marc Girardot, the bolus theory can explain how and why the mRNA COVID shots damage the heart and other organs
  • Several other theories and hypotheses have also been proposed, including molecular mimicry, immune response to mRNA, dysregulated cytokine expression, ACE2 suppression, endothelial damage, lipid nanoparticles triggering syncytia formation and impeding the electrical conduction of the heart, and more

August 3, 2023, the Australian Senate Education and Employment Committee1 held a COVID hearing in which Sen. Gerard Rennick asked Dr. Krishan Thiru, Pfizer’s Australian medical director, to explain the mechanism of how the mRNA COVID shot causes myocarditis.2

Thiru, however, kept talking in circles rather than answering the question. Rennick valiantly tried, without success, to redirect him back to the question at hand, which was: Does Pfizer understand how the shot is causing damage to the heart?

The take-home here is that either a) Pfizer has no idea how the shot damages the heart, which raises serious questions about the company’s scientific qualifications or b) they do know but refuse to admit it, because if they do, it creates liability. As noted by Rennick, how can Pfizer say the shot is safe if they don’t understand the risk?

Pfizer Sponsored Groups Calling for Jab Mandates

Pfizer has not only insisted its COVID jab is safe and effective, and that side effects like myocarditis are vanishingly rare (despite athletes and young people dropping from heart problems at rates never seen before), the company also appears to have sponsored campaigns to push for the jab to be mandated, at least in the U.S., thereby maximizing the potential damage along with profits.

According to investigative reporter Lee Fang,3 Pfizer financed a long list of U.S. groups that lobbied for COVID jab mandates, including consumer groups, medical groups, public health organizations as and civil rights organizations. In the video above, UnHerd reporter Florence Read interviews Fang about his findings. Notable recipients of Pfizer funding just prior to or during the jab rollout included:4

The Chicago Urban League, which accepted a $100,000 donation from Pfizer to promote “vaccine safety and effectiveness.” Unlike other corporate donations, this one was not publicly disclosed on the League’s website.
The National Consumers League, which received $75,000 from Pfizer earmarked for “vaccine policy efforts.” As noted by Fang, Andrea LaRue, an NCL board member, also happens to be a “highly paid contract lobbyist to Pfizer, focused on vaccine policy,” and this conflict of interest also was not disclosed.
The Immunization Partnership, which received, but did not disclose, a $35,000 donation from Pfizer for “legislative advocacy” in 2021, the same year they lobbied against Texas legislation to prevent vaccine passports and vaccine mandates for municipal workers.
The American Pharmacists Association, American College of Preventive Medicine, Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and the American College of Emergency Physicians, all of which signed a letter5 in support of Biden’s unconstitutional jab mandate for employers with 100 or more employees, after receiving grants from Pfizer.
The National Hispanic Medical Association, which worked with a public relations firm to distribute “press release and media placements” that “called on employers of essential workers to mandate COVID-19 vaccines.” They also lobbied in favor of Biden’s vaccine mandate — all after receiving $30,000 from BIO, a vaccine industry lobby group that represents Pfizer and Moderna.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, which received several specialized grants from Pfizer in 2021. State chapters also received Pfizer grants earmarked for vaccine policy lobbying efforts.

Who Are These Institutions Working For?

[…]

Indeed, as attorney Jenin Younes told Fang, “If people or institutions advocated for or implemented mandates, while failing to disclose ties to the vaccine companies, that is a serious ethical violation, and potentially even unlawful, and should be thoroughly investigated.”7

How the COVID Jab Can Damage Your Heart

As for how Pfizer’s mRNA COVID jab can damage your heart, several scientists have thrown their 2 cents into the discussion. One of them is Marc Girardot, a member of Pandemics Data & Analysis (PANDA8), a “multidisciplinary, sense-making group of global experts who encourage good science, rational debate and sound public policy, with the aim of empowering people to make informed decisions” about COVID-19.

On his Substack,9 Girardot features a long list of articles “debunking the COVID narrative with observations, facts, data and rigorous scientific method.” In a June 5, 2023, article,10 he focused on the bolus theory, which can help explain how and why the mRNA jabs can trigger myocarditis and other cardiovascular problems.

[…]

Normally, you’re supposed to pull back on the plunger to make sure you’re not hitting a blood vessel before you inject a vaccine. This is known as aspiration.

In the case of the COVID jabs, health authorities instructed vaccine administrators to skip this step. Back in January 2023, Bret Weinstein of the DarkHorse podcast briefly brought up Girardot’s bolus theory on the Joe Rogan Show (video below).12

Myocarditis Is Just the Tip of the Iceberg

Girardot points out that vaccine injuries will “always” involve several locations, not just a single organ like the heart.

[…]

In an August 5, 2023, tweet, Girardot argued that the bolus theory is “the very mechanism of action of any transfecting vaccine.”13

[…]

Hypotheses Cited by Vaccine Pusher

Another theory for how the COVID jabs can cause myocarditis has been presented by none other than Dr. Peter Hotez, a vaccine pusher if there ever was one.

In July 2021, he published a paper14 in the journal Circulation, citing the hypothesis that molecular mimicry between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and self-antigens might trigger “preexisting dysregulated immune pathways in certain individuals, immune response to mRNA, and activation of immunologic pathways, and dysregulated cytokine expression.”

“The reasons for male predominance in myocarditis cases are unknown, but possible explanations relate to sex hormone differences in immune response and myocarditis, and also underdiagnosis of cardiac disease in women,” he noted.

Other Mechanisms of Harm

Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., also has detailed mechanisms of action that can explain how the COVID shots damage the heart. For example, back in 2021, she pointed out that the spike protein that your body produces in response to the COVID-19 shot suppresses ACE2, which can trigger problems such as pulmonary hypertension, ventricular heart failure and stroke.15,16 But that’s not all.

In May 2021, Seneff co-wrote a paper17 titled “Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research. In it, she describes the spike protein as a metabolic poison with wide-ranging effects.

[…]

74% of Post-Jab Deaths Linked to the Shot

Video Link

Dr. Peter McCullough has also presented hypotheses for how the shot damages the heart. In a July 2023 systematic review19,20 of 325 autopsy cases, McCullough and his team concluded that 62.5% to 73.9% of post-jab deaths were likely caused by the injection.

The most implicated organ system was the cardiovascular system (53%), followed by the hematological system (17%), the respiratory system (8%), and multiple organ systems (7%).

In the featured Daily Clout interview above, McCullough explains the jab’s mechanisms of action that appear to be responsible for a majority of post-jab heart-related deaths. In myocarditis, the electrical current can no longer conduct smoothly through the heart muscle, causing an abnormal heart rhythm. This abnormal heart rhythm can then lead to sudden cardiac death.

Lipid nanoparticles have been found to damage electrical conduction in the myelin sheath, so it makes sense that they may also damage electrical conduction in the heart. What’s more, when lipid nanoparticles are taken up by human somatic cells — nonreproductive cells, found in the heart and other internal organs — it causes syncytia formation, a process in which individual cells fuse together. This, in turn, can exacerbate the progression of heart failure.21

Because the heart prefers lipids over glucose for fuel, it may preferentially take up lipid nanoparticles, more so than other tissues. On top of that, exercise increases blood flow, which draws more lipid nanoparticles to the heart. Once your heart is inflamed, adrenaline surges can become deadly.

McCullough cites research showing there are two primary periods of sudden cardiac death: during exercise and between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m. The common factor between these two is adrenaline. Adrenaline surges during exercise and in the natural waking process. If you have myocarditis, this adrenaline surge can be enough to trigger sudden cardiac death.

Why Can’t Pfizer Answer the Question?

As you can see, there’s no shortage of theories and hypotheses to explain how the mRNA COVID shots can damage your heart and cause myocarditis, so the fact that Pfizer’s reps cannot cite a single mechanism of action to explain it is simply not believable.

It’s not that they can’t answer the question. They don’t want to, and the most likely reason for holding this information back is because if they admit knowing how the damage is done, they may be held liable since they never warned anyone about it. Their safest route right now is to say they don’t know, and then, at some point in the future, pretend as though a recent investigation finally solved the mystery.

[…]

Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jab

Aside from autopsy assessments, case reports of harms and various other studies, things like job statistics, disability claims, life insurance claims and all-cause mortality statistics also tell us that the COVID jabs are having a devastating effect.23 All have skyrocketed since the introduction of these COVID jabs.

If you got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, first and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your body.

The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects. Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots.

When it comes to treatment, it seems like many of the treatments that worked against severe COVID-19 infection also help ameliorate adverse effects from the jab. This makes sense, as the toxic, most damaging part of the virus is the spike protein, and that’s what your whole body is producing if you got the jab.

[…]

Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/08/15/pfizer-is-hiding-how-covid-jab-damages-the-heart.aspx

Biden Censors Battered — Epic Supreme Court Showdown Expected

Posted on by
4

Federal Judge Terry DoughtyFederal Judge Terry Doughty condemned the Biden admin for what he called maybe “the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.”Youtube

New York Post

Federal judges hammered fresh nails into the coffin of the Biden censorship regime Thursday in New Orleans.The thrashing the administration received will likely set up an epic Supreme Court battle that could help redefine freedom for our era.A federal appeals court was hearing the Justice Department’s appeal of a July 4 decision in Missouri v. Biden that ignited pro-freedom rhetorical fireworks across the nation.Federal Judge Terry Doughty’s opinion condemned the Biden administration for potentially “the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history.”

Doughty delivered 155 pages of damning details of federal browbeating, jawboning and coercion of social-media companies.

He issued an injunction blocking the feds from “encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”

The Biden administration rushed to sway the appeals court to postpone enforcement of the injunction and then sought to redefine all its closed-door shenanigans as public service.

In its briefs to the court, the Justice Department declared, “There is a categorical, well-settled distinction between persuasion and coercion,” and castigated Judge Doughty for having “equated legitimate efforts at persuasion with illicit efforts to coerce.”

The department denies that federal agencies bullied social-media companies to suppress any information.

Instead, there were simply requests for “content moderation,” especially regarding COVID.

Actually, there were tens of thousands of “requests” that resulted in the suppression of millions of posts and comments by Americans.

Team Biden champions a “no corpse, no delicta” definition of censorship.

Since federal SWAT teams did not assail the headquarters of social-media firms, the feds are blameless.

Or, as Justice Department lawyer Daniel Tenny told the judges, “There was a back and forth. Sometimes it was more friendly, sometimes people got more testy. There were circumstances in which everyone saw eye to eye, there were circumstances in which they disagreed.”

It’s irrelevant that President Joe Biden publicly accused social-media companies of murder for not censoring far more material and that Biden appointees publicly threatened to destroy the companies via legislation or prosecution.

Nope: It was just neighborly discussions between good folks.

At the hearing, Judge Don Willett, one of the most principled and penetrating judges in the nation, had no problem with federal agencies publicly criticizing what they judged false or dangerous ideas.

But that wasn’t how Team Biden compelled submission: “Here you have government in secret, in private, out of the public eye, relying on . . . subtle strong-arming and veiled or not-so-veiled threats.”

Willett vivified how the feds played the game: “That’s a really nice social-media platform you’ve got there, it would be a shame if something happened to it.”

Judge Jennifer Elrod compared the Biden censorship regime to the Mafia: “We see with the mob . . . they have these ongoing relationships. They never actually say, ‘Go do this or else you’re going to have this consequence.’ But everybody just knows.”

Yet the Biden administration was supposedly innocent because the feds never explicitly spelled out “or else,” according to the Justice Department lawyer.

This is on par with redefining armed robbery as a consensual activity unless the robber specifically points his gun at the victim’s head.

As economist Joseph Schumpeter aptly observed, “Power wins, not by being used, but by being there.”

On top of censorship, the feds used deceit to taint the 2020 presidential election.

As Dean John Sauer, the state of Missouri’s lawyer, explained, the FBI “engaged in deception” by prepping social-media platforms to expect false reports on Hunter Biden and then failing to admit the FBI had verified his laptop as authentic.

That spurred pervasive suppression of the New York Post exposé in October 2020.

It was a prime example of federal meddling that Judge Doughty invoked to justify leashing the FBI and other agencies.

Because Biden ended the COVID emergency in May, the Justice Department pretends this case’s issues are moot.

But the Biden administration also pressured social-media companies “to censor misinformation regarding climate change, gender discussions, abortion and economic policy,” as the July 4 court decision noted.

There is no reason to expect Team Biden and federal censorship contractors will not seek to taint another presidential election next year.

At least two of the three judges on last week’s panel will likely uphold all or part of the injunction against federal censorship.

The Biden administration will probably speedily appeal the case to the Supreme Court, setting up an epic showdown.

[…]

Via https://nypost.com/2023/08/13/biden-censors-battered-expect-an-epic-supreme-court-showdown/

Families of COVID Victims Sue EcoHealth Alliance Alleging Gain-of-Function Research Caused ‘Undue Risk’ and ‘Harm’

Posted on by
6

By  Monica Dutcher

The families of four people who died from COVID-19 and one person injured by the virus are suing EcoHealth Alliance and the international nonprofit’s president, Peter Daszak, Ph.D., and a cohort of government and elected officials, hospitals, military personnel and others.

According to a complaint filed Aug. 2 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, the defendants exposed the plaintiffs to “undue risk and actual harm” — “whether accidental or intentional” — by helping to fund and conduct gain-of-function (GOF) research, create and release COVID-19, and conspire “to cover up” these actions.

Patricia Finn, the victims’ attorney, told the New York Post:

“If we had known the source or origin of this virus and had not been misled that it was from a pangolin in a wet market, and rather we knew that it was a genetically manipulated virus, and that the scientists involved were concealing that from our clients, the outcome could have been very different.”

The plaintiffs allege the defendants “knew that coronaviruses were dangerous and capable of causing a worldwide pandemic in the human population” and that severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) — SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) — was a readily transmissible disease, airborne, and could spread through small droplets of saliva in a similar way to cold and influenza.

Four of the plaintiffs, named below, claim wrongful death of a family member, each of whom “died as a direct and proximate result of medical complications” caused by a COVID-19 infection.

  • Jenny Golden, daughter of Mary Conroy, died in August 2021.
  • Monique Adams, daughter of Emma D. Holley, died in August 2021.
  • Traci Osuna, wife of Raul Osuna, died in September 2021.
  • Melissa Carr, wife of Larry W. Carr, died in August 2021.

Plaintiff Paul Rinker’s claim is for personal injuries. Rinker was diagnosed with COVID-19 in 2021, hospitalized and placed in the intensive care unit.

According to the complaint, many of the defendants’ failures are documented in U.S. Inspector Gen. Christi Grimm’s January report, “The National Institutes of Health and EcoHealth Alliance Did Not Effectively Monitor Awards and Subawards, Resulting In Missed Opportunities to Oversee Research and Other Deficiencies.”

The U.S. Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found NIH and EcoHealth did not sufficiently comply with procedures, which limited their abilities to “effectively monitor federal grant awards and subawards to understand the nature of the research conducted, identify potential problem areas, and take corrective action.”

The report noted the NIH did not refer the research to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for an “outside review for enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (ePPPs) because it [NIH] determined the research did not involve and was not reasonably anticipated to create, use, or transfer an ePPP.”

The OIG concluded:

“NIH missed opportunities to more effectively monitor research. With improved oversight, NIH may have been able to take more timely corrective actions to mitigate the inherent risks associated with this type of research.”

In 2014, EcoHealth received its first $666,442 of a $4.3 million grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases — under then-Director Anthony Fauci — to study the risk of bat coronavirus emergence and the potential for outbreaks in human populations.

The research included genetically manipulating coronaviruses to make them more infectious to humans.

Emails revealed the NIH colluded with EcoHealth to circumvent federal restrictions on GOF research and avoid oversight. At least two NIH officials expressed concern that the experiment might fall under the designation of GOF experiments banned under a 2014 federal moratorium.

According to The Intercept, Daszak stated in emails that WIV1, the parent of chimeric SARS-like viruses, “has never been demonstrated to infect humans or cause human disease.” Yet three months earlier, in March 2016, Daszak’s collaborator, Ralph Baric, Ph.D., published a paper showing WIV1 did indeed have the ability to infect humans and posed a threat to the human population.

In April 2020, under the Trump administration, the NIH terminated EcoHealth’s grant over concerns the organization had violated the grant terms, using U.S. taxpayer money to fund GOF research at the Wuhan lab.

In May, NIH reinstated its grant to EcoHealth to study the risk of bat coronavirus spillover.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-gain-of-function-ecohealth-lawsuit/

US ambassador signals potential Julian Assange plea deal

Posted on by
5

US Ambassador to Australia Caroline Kennedy  (Brook Mitchell)

Jorge Branco

nine.com.au

The United State Australian envoy has indicated there could be a “resolution” to the ongoing detention of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is fighting extradition to the United States from the United Kingdom to face spying charges.

The Australian has battled in British courts for years to avoid being sent to the US, where he faces 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse over WikiLeaks’ publication of classified diplomatic and military documents more than a decade ago.The latest blow to the Australian’s hopes came earlier this month when US Secretary of State Antony Blinken pushed back against Australian calls for an end to the Assange prosecution.

“Mr Assange was charged with very serious criminal conduct in the United States in connection with his alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of our country,” Blinken said at the time.But US ambassador to Australia Caroline Kennedy, who met with Assange supporters at Parliament House in June, has now indicated a potential plea deal could allow him to return to Australia.

Asked by the Sydney Morning Herald whether a diplomatic outcome could be reached, she said “it’s not really a diplomatic issue, but I think that there absolutely could be a resolution”.

In comments published on Monday, she said “there is a way to resolve it” but stressed any potential agreement was “up to the Justice Department”.

[…]

Via https://www.9news.com.au/national/julian-assange-update-us-ambassador-caroline-kennedy-flags-potential-plea-deal/5b417912-6a88-44bc-98a6-e95601490958<

Are You Ready for the Collapse of the Medical System?

Posted on by
6

https://healthimpactnews.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/08/Medical-system-collapse.jpg

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The medical system in the United States today is on the brink of collapse.

I seriously doubt that there are too many people who would question or doubt this statement.

For example, 100,000 nurses have left the medical system since COVID, and 800,000 more nurses plan on quitting. (Source.)

Pharmaceutical drug shortages have become so severe, that pharmacists and hospitals are now rationing medical care. (Source.)

And many hospitals are now “dumping” patients on the street, because they can no longer afford to care for them, as they refuse to leave.

This crisis in the medical system is happening right now, even before the economy totally collapses.

So when the economy does collapse, and these medical products and services are no longer available to you, what are you going to do?

Have you given any thought or made any plans for when this day comes, which could literally come tomorrow?

The Pharmaceutical Model for “Healthcare” is a Total Failure

The first thing to realize when preparing for the coming system collapse, is that the medical system was never really healing anyone anyway, and in fact the life-span of Americans may actually increase if medical services become largely unavailable to the general public.

The past three years have shown us the total bankruptcy of the “healthcare” system, which has very little if anything to do with “health” at all, and should be properly called the “medical system,” as the criminal behaviors from this system have been on display for the whole world to see via the COVID-19 scam.

The COVID-19 scamdemic did not corrupt the medical system. The corrupt medical system gave us the COVID-19 scam.

COVID-19 only revealed the true motives of this system, which is to enslave people through medical tyranny, and not heal people.

Healing people is a terrible business model, as you eliminate your repeat customers.

The medical system was the #1 cause of death before COVID arrived on the scene, due to hospital errors and adverse reactions to their drugs, including vaccines.

[…]

Via https://healthimpactnews.com/2023/are-you-ready-for-the-collapse-of-the-medical-system/

The Role of Gandhi in India’s Independence Movement

Posted on by
Reply

Trouble with Gandhi in South Africa | The Guardian Nigeria News - Nigeria and World News ...

Episode 28 Mahatma Gandhi

A History of India

Michael Fisher (2016)

Film Review

Gandhi was born 1869 in Porbander, a small kingdom of 70,000 in Gujarat that came under indirect British rule during his father’s lifetime.* Born into the Vaishya varna, Ghandi was descended from three generations of Gujarati prime ministers. Historically his family were grocers (the meaning of the name Gandhi).

After entering into an arranged marriage at 13, Gandhi had his first son (who died) at 16. After having two more sons, he left his family at 18 to study in the UK. In addition to qualifying as a barrister, he also studied dancing, violin and French to increase his acceptance in British society. He also concealed hi marriage in order to meet British women.

Returning to India at 21, he had to abandon his law practice when he couldn’t attract any clients. At 24, he again left his family to join the Indian diaspora in South Africa. At the time, South Africa consisted of the Dutch colonies of Transvaal and the Orange Free State and the British colonies of Cape Colony and Natal. Gandhi would spend the next 20 years in Natal, the capitol of Durban.

Following the abolition of slavery, Natal replaced their slaves with Indian indentured servants. When Gandhi arrived, there were 40,000 Indians in Natal, which was roughly equal to the white population.

After the British government arbitrarily increased the term of indenture from five to ten years, as well as adding a special tax on Indian immigrants, Gandhi organized a successful campaign to repeal the tax. Forming the Natal Indian Congress, he went to lead nonviolent protests against the first anti-Apartheid laws. As he and his supporters filled up the jails, the British authorities had no choice but to start releasing them.

He returned to India at age 46. One of the first campaigns he engaged in was in Chamaran in Behar to support striking indigo farmers. Following his arrest, Gandhi used his own trial to force the police spies who were surveilling him to testify.

He subsequently went to Ahmedabad to support textile workers striking against Indian factory owners.** During a a plague outbreak, they increased wages due to a shortage of workers and then decreased them after the epidemic passed. Gandhi used his first hunger strike (threatening to fast until death) to force the factory owners to restore the wage cut. This led to the formation of one of India’s first labor unions.

Gandhi openly oppose militant nationalist groups who used assassinations and bombings to pressure Britain to grant India independence. Asserting that Indians weren’t morally ready for independence, he called off a national strike when militants burned down a police station with the British officers inside.

Despite reaching out to untouchables, he was unsuccessful in enlisting them in his Quit India movement because he opposed the special constituencies they sought (where only untouchables could run for office or vote). He was equally unsuccessful in recruiting Muslims to his independence movement (despite his ultimate assassination by a Hindu nationalist for being too sympathetic to Muslims).

*Britain had granted nominal sovereignty to all the princely states that didn’t rebel in 1857. See  India’s 1857 Peoples Rebellion

**India’s textile industry was in the process of being killed off by cheap textile imports from Britain.

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/video/366254/366227

Pharmaceutical drugs becoming so tainted Defense Department calls for outside testing

Posted on by
3

DANGEROUS MEDS: Pharmaceutical drugs becoming so tainted that the Defense Department is calling for outside testing

Dr Eddy Betterman

The world’s pharmaceutical drug factories have become so filthy that the United States Department of Defense (DoD) is intervening to try to clean things up by bringing in an outside testing service to spot contamination.

Valisure, an independent testing laboratory that deals with this kind of thing, was brought in by the DoD to test a slew of medications amid growing concerns about pharmaceutical drug contamination and other quality and supply issues.

Under a multi-year agreement, Valisure will test dozens of popularly used drugs for dangerous chemicals. The lab will also rate manufacturers’ quality to help the DoD weed out those that produce substandard products.

Because the cooperative agreement has been designated as a “research and development” operation to exchange information, the Pentagon will not be paying Valisure for these testing services.

(Related: Guess what kills more American children than guns do? Wuhan coronavirus [Covid-19] “vaccines.”)

Some generic drugs contain cancer-causing contaminants

The U.S. government is primarily focused on generic drugs made by foreign companies usually based in either China or India. Because of domestic shortages, increasingly more Americans are relying on foreign drugs to get their fix, and the DoD says it is worried that consumers are taking tainted products.

The covid “pandemic” shined a really bright light on America’s growing dependence on foreign drugs, so much so that Congress ordered the DoD to take this next step in confirming their safety.

“Drug shortages are at a nine-year high as manufacturers deal with quality issues, difficulty getting supplies and rising demand for certain drugs,” reports Bloomberg about the matter.

In speaking about the new partnership, Valisure CEO David Light told the media that this is a critical next step to ensure that Americans are receiving the safe, high-quality products they think they are.

“Beyond the importance this holds for national security, the Department of Defense is also a large health system with millions of patients,” Light said. “This DoD initiative can be a powerful model for improving the generic drug market.”

Valisure has a solid track record in identifying carcinogenic (cancer-causing) chemicals in not just pharmaceutical drugs but also personal care products like sunscreen, hand sanitizer, and dry shampoo.

You may recall that back in 2019, the heartburn pill Zantac was taken off the market. Valisure’s identification of a carcinogen in those pills is what led to that drug no longer being available to consumers.

Kaiser Permanente, a California-based sick care system, is also working with Valisure to conduct drug checks on products used at its hospitals.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is none too happy about this, though. The federal agency does not like anyone using Valisure, and especially the DoD, because it claims that independent drug testing labs are “untrustworthy” and their actions could lead to unwanted shortages.

The FDA does admit, however, that 62 percent of drug shortages in the U.S. are caused by quality issues stemming from poor manufacturing practices. Carboplatin and cisplatin, two popular cancer drugs, are both prominent examples of this as they are currently in short supply due to their manufacturer, based out of India, running a dirty operation that prompted a regulatory shutdown.

“Our country’s reliance on active pharmaceutical ingredients and medicines manufactured abroad in China and India has come at significant cost of safety,” warned Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Ct.) about the matter.

Those interested in learning more about Valisure’s scoring system, developed by Light, can check out this study published in the Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, which unpacks the details further.

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2023/08/13/pharmaceutical-drugs-tainted-dod-for-outside-testing/

Regulatory Science as Propaganda

Posted on by
Reply

regulatory science and propagandaJ R Bruning

Brownstone Institute

For many, the nagging inkling that the state of policy-relevant and regulatory science was less robust and trustworthy than official sources claimed came roaring into focus with COVID-19. For those that had a nose for contradictions and inconsistency, the perpetual urgencies to believe the scientific claims of a handful of special scientists on the telly fell rather flat.

The global population was required to acquiesce to a brand-new technology, a gene therapy unaccompanied by genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies, nor completed trials for pregnant mothers. A technology where heart risk was known from the get-go. Unbelievably, the endpoint in the clinical trials was never prevention of transmission, nor prevention of hospitalisation and death.

In a pattern akin to the respect demanded of high priests, the only purveyors of God’s message; special scientists were the Final Word when it came to The Science and health-based risk throughout COVID-19. Like high priests, their scientific claims could not be questioned. If we didn’t acquiesce to the technology, we were not only anti-science and anti-vax. We would be anti-health.

How has The Science come to be the Final Word in modern societies? At its core, powerful institutions have exploited public confidence and trust that science is produced in a neutral and impartial manner. Governments and powerful institutions have taken this trust that science is objective, and capitalized. Because of the opportunity this presents, ‘objectivity is a priceless adjunct to governmental power.’

Sociologist and lawyer Sheila Jasanoff has theorised that objectivity has the tool-like qualities of a talisman – one that would ward off the appearance of political bias. For Jasanoff, impartiality through the use of science and evidence acts to ‘erase the stamps of agency and subjectivity.’

Yet policy-relevant science is a different beast from basic or research science. It does double duty. It must be acceptable scientifically and politically. The effect is that any claimed objectivity is subjective. It depends on what science is used, who the experts are, and how this science is valued, and this depends on political cultures and priorities. Such science is therefore ‘contingent, vulnerable to criticism and tends to unravel under adversarial challenge.’

But there’s more. Powerful shifts in the past 50 years have weakened the threads between the public and regulators, while more closely binding regulators to the industries that they are charged with regulating. Like sliding dials on an amplifier, the power of corporations has increased as they have consolidated and became more powerful. The capacity for public sector and regulatory scientists to broadly research risk has declined.

Globally basic science and interdisciplinary funding has shrunk dramatically, while the problems that these types of research could shine a light on have asymmetrically expanded.

Public-sector funding scopes direct science and research funding away from research that might untangle the relationships between biology, social life, and environmental emissions and exposures. Lawyers who seek to undertake interdisciplinary research also find themselves stymied. The consequence is that autonomous interdisciplinary experts that can inform government officials and challenge their decisions are scarce.

This long-read is drawn from a recent paper by New Zealand charity PSGR.

Regulation of technologies favour the interests of the regulated industries at every turn

Knowledge is the currency of private industry, and regulators come to depend on industry expertise. Regulatory capture can happen from the get-go. If regulators are neither required nor funded to pursue inquiry outside regulator-industry relations, they are unlikely to.

Government agencies can engage in practices of public engagement that resemble consultation. In practice, the substituted activities fail to address the core issues that the public wants discussed. The substituted activities in effect perform transparency, accountability, and debate. Seasoned public interest advocates will back up this claim.

[…]

In modern academic and public research environments controversial information that contradicts government policy or industry partners (or potential partners) is politically and professionally unwelcome. Funding for expensive research is extraordinarily difficult to secure, and most institutions have private industry partners to help drive research income.

If scientists aren’t funded to consider difficult issues, that work won’t happen. They won’t review relevant science findings, provide context for issues that are ambiguous and complex, and help society navigate them. The work certainly won’t happen if it contradicts the interests of big business.

As with captured regulators, these research environments then pivot to reflect the aims and priorities of industry partners, and the funding scopes set by central government agencies.

The effect is that policy-makers accept and defend the private industry claims, instead of challenging them.

There’s no feedback loop where basic science and interdisciplinary teams are encouraged to critically review and triangulate the claims of corporations. Institutional knowledge and peer networks with expertise to pick apart complex issues have been eroded. Without the feedback into official and regulatory environments, raw data is not scrutinised, models reign supreme, and real-world data is neglected.

[…]

When citizens protest, and provide scientific studies they’re dismissed, because, well, they’re not scientists.

The effect is a fundamental democratic rift. It is the decoupling of nation states from independent information streams and meaningful critical enquiry.

What is the term for information that is strategically managed and selectively presented to encourage a particular synthesis or perception? Propaganda.

This is a massive issue, because in the 21st century scientific and technical information is fundamental to policy. As a political priority, the rails for science that tracks to safety claims are greased – in policy and in law. Feedback loops into legacy media then reflect these political positions.

[…]

Pick your technology, your medical solution, your emission, your digital solution

Most are aware that chemical regulation is subpar, with chemicals used in the industrial, agrichemical, pharmaceutical, household, and personal care sectors underregulated. However, the democratic deficits, the captured regulatory processes, occur across a wide range of technologies including nanotechnology, biotechnology, geoengineering, and radiofrequency radiation.

[…]

Regulators often rely on very old science and unpublished studies to claim a particular level of exposure is safe. For example, the World Health Organization (WHO) safe drinking levels for pesticides often rely on levels that are derived from unpublished industry studies which are several decades old. It’s uncomfortable to think that the WHO’s safe level for glyphosate in drinking water is derived from an unpublished 1981 Monsanto study. Somewhat contradictorily, old authoritative data isn’t subject to the same high standards that regulators apply when they turn to decide which studies fit their guidelines for risk assessment.

No matter the burgeoning literature, nor court cases which uncover boatloads of studies which suggest risk at much lower levels than a 1981 Monsanto study. That old study remains in place, ruling the roost.

Hormone level risks are only vaguely considered by regulators. One or two studies might be provided by industry, but the broader scientific literature is largely ignored. Toxicologists might be employed by regulatory authorities, but not endocrinologists. Conventional toxicology dose-response rules don’t apply when it comes to hormone level risk. Hormone-level effects and epidemiological studies can signal harm long before it is seen in toxicological studies.

Narrow regulatory reasoning doesn’t just apply to chemicals and biotechnologies. New Zealand’s standards for radiofrequency fields are over two decades old. No reviews have been undertaken to identify new pathways of risk, such as what the pulsing effect of radiofrequencies may do at the cellular level.

[…]

When private industry information is not subject to robust debate and challenge, it’s propaganda

The information is produced for the purpose of permitting an activity to occur. The information has a tangible effect; it is to assure society that the activity is perfectly acceptable, and that society will not be adversely harmed. However, that information cannot be contested, and is asymmetrically weighted to favour powerful institutions. Corporations and government work closely to ensure that the information is acceptable, and the rules and guidelines are often light years behind the scientific literature. Conversely, the technologies used by the industry scientists are leading edge. Over and over again, it can be demonstrated that the rules and guidelines are so inadequate and archaic that it is likely that society might be misled and deceived by the assurances of safety.

[…]

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/regulatory-science-as-propaganda/

 

Florida Republican introduces impeachment articles against Joe Biden

Posted on by
6
Joe and Hunter Biden

By Chris Pandolfo | Fox News

House Republicans call for Biden impeachment inquiry after release of bank records

Fox News’ Chad Pergram reports on the GOP’s investigation into the Biden family money tree.

Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., jumped ahead of his Republican colleagues on Friday and introduced articles of impeachment against President Biden.

While several congressional committees are building a multipronged case to remove Biden from office, Steube said it was past time to take action. He filed articles of impeachment against Biden charging that the president had been complicit in his son Hunter’s alleged crimes and had worked to shield him from justice.

“It’s long past time to impeach Joe Biden,” Steube said in a statement. “He has undermined the integrity of his office, brought disrepute on the Presidency, betrayed his trust as President, and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice at the expense of America’s citizens.”

Steube filed four articles alleging high crimes and misdemeanors by Biden.

The first accuses the president of abusing the power of his office by allegedly accepting bribes, committing Hobbs Act extortion and honest services fraud related to use of his official position. These charges arise from Biden’s alleged involvement with his family’s business dealings, including Hunter and James Biden’s (the president’s brother) alleged effort to sell access to then-Vice President Biden between 2009 and 2017 in exchange for “payments and business opportunities from foreign and domestic business partners.”

House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky, on Wednesday released a memo purporting to show that foreign payments to the Biden family totaled more than $20 million — though Democrats say none of the evidence shows that President Biden accepted any payments or committed misconduct.

The second article charges that President Biden obstructed justice, citing IRS whistleblower testimony that “members of the Biden campaign improperly colluded with Justice Department (DOJ) officials to improperly interfere with investigations into tax crimes alleged to have been committed by Hunter Biden.” Both the Justice Department and special counsel David Weiss, the U.S. attorney appointed to investigate Hunter Biden, have denied that the Biden administration impeded Weiss’ work.

The third and fourth articles accuse Biden of “fraud” and paying for Hunter Biden’s illegal drugs and trysts with prostitutes, respectively.

“The evidence continues to mount by the day – the Biden Crime Family has personally profited off Joe’s government positions through bribery, threats, and fraud. Joe Biden must not be allowed to continue to sit in the White House, selling out our country,” Steube said.

On the same day, Steube introduced legislation to require the Secret Service chief to write a report on the illicit use of controlled substances in the White House. The move comes after the Secret Service closed its investigation into cocaine found at the White House last month without identifying a person of interest. Steube named the bill the “Helping Understand Narcotics Traces at the Executive Residence (HUNTER) Act.”

“The United States Secret Service (USSS) refers to themselves as one of the most elite law enforcement agencies in the world. It’s completely unacceptable that the USSS has failed to find who is responsible for bringing cocaine into one of the most secure buildings in the world,” he said. “The American people deserve answers. My legislation demands information on the closed investigation into the cocaine found at the White House in July and focuses on how Congress can provide oversight to prevent future illicit usage of controlled substances in the White House.”

Steube’s articles of impeachment have jumped ahead of at least four GOP-led committee investigations pursuing avenues to impeach Biden or his top officials. The White House has ridiculed suggestions that Biden should be removed from office.

“We’re not going to get into what House Republicans want to do or may not do — hypotheticals. That’s on them. That’s for them to speak to. What I can speak to is exactly what we’re doing today.” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in July.

[…]

Via https://www.foxnews.com/politics/florida-republican-introduces-impeachment-articles-against-joe-biden

US Democratic lawmakers tell corrupt judge to resign from Supreme Court

Posted on by
4

Justice Clarence Thomas (2nd person from left to right in the front row) in this picture which shows all nine current members of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), the highest court in the federal judiciary of the US as composed on June 30, 2022. (Photo by SCOTUS)

US Democratic lawmakers have called on Justice Clarence Thomas to resign from his post as a Supreme Court justice.

A new report by ProPublica news organization revealed on Thursday that Thomas had received far more undeclared gifts and vacations from rich donors than previously reported.

At least 38 destination vacations, including a previously unreported voyage on a yacht around the Bahamas; 26 private jet flights, plus an additional eight by helicopter; a dozen VIP passes to professional and college sporting events, typically perched in the skybox; two stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica; and one standing invitation to an uber-exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic coast are just a few of the stream of luxury gifts he received during his three decades on the Supreme Court, the recent ProPublica report revealed.

It added that Thomas had happily accepted—and did not disclose— the many luxury vacations he went on from four different billionaires: Harlan Crow, David Sokol, H. Wayne Huizenga, and Paul Novelly.

 

Earlier, ProPublica reported in April 2023 that Thomas had “accepted luxury trips virtually every year.”

In return for the gifts he had received from the donors, Thomas hosted an annual fundraiser at the Supreme Court for an exclusive society to which they all belong.

While some of the hospitality Thomas received, such as stays in personal homes, may not have required legal disclosure, the Supreme Court Justice appears to have violated the law by failing to disclose flights, yacht cruises and expensive sports tickets, according to experts.

The total value of the undisclosed gifts received by Thomas since 1991, the year he was appointed to the Supreme Court, is difficult to measure, but it is easily likely to be in the millions.

Ethics experts described Thomas’ conduct as an “abuse of office” and “the height of hypocrisy.”

Democratic lawmakers are calling for Thomas to resign after it was revealed that he has accepted gifts from billionaires for decades in exchange for access to the Supreme Court.

“Justice Thomas’ alleged actions don’t just appear corrupt, they are corrupt,” said Congressman Ted W. Lieu (D-Los Angeles County).

Lieu insisted that the senior US judge “has brought shame upon himself and the United States Supreme Court” and ought to “immediately” resign.

He called on Thomas to resign over his “stunning” corruption.

“In my career I don’t remember ever seeing this degree of largesse given to anybody,” said Jeremy Fogel, a former federal judge who served for years on the judicial committee that reviews judges’ financial disclosures. “I think it’s unprecedented.”

Thomas, however, denies any wrongdoings.

Supreme Court Justices, who are nominally subject to ethics rules for federal judges, are in practice governed by themselves.

Thomas claims never to have discussed with his donors politics or business before the court, and to have been wrongly advised about disclosure requirements.

Via https://counterinformation.wordpress.com/2023/08/11/us-democratic-lawmakers-tellcorrupt-judge-to-resign-from-supreme-court/