Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in Atlanta on May 5, 2023. (Elijah Nouvelage/AFP via Getty Images)

CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told colleagues in the Jan. 30, 2021, missive that she had spoken with Dr. Francis Collins that morning “and one of the issues we discussed was that of vaccine breakthroughs.”

“Breakthrough” refers to vaccinated people becoming infected.

“This is clearly and [sic] important area of study and was specifically called out this week here,” Walensky said, providing a link to an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

In the editorial, immunologist John Moore and vaccine inventor Dr. Paul Offit said there was a “growing threat” of COVID-19 variants emerging that would “escape” the protection bestowed by COVID-19 vaccines, which had been authorized in December 2020.

Early testing found that antibodies conferred by Moderna’s vaccine were less active against one of the new variants that had emerged, they noted.

Moore and Offit called for testing of vaccinated people who were hospitalized with COVID-19, the creation of a national sequencing program to quickly identify new variants and the development of a repository of samples taken from vaccinated people.

Walensky said she had discussed the matter a few weeks prior with Dr. Nancy Messonnier, another top CDC official.

“I understand that [redacted],” Walensky wrote to Messonnier and three other CDC employees.

“Should we discuss? What is the best next step forward?”

Collins, at the time the director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, was discussing the matter with Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the chief architects of the U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Walensky.

The email was included in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Requests for records from roughly the same time seeking what top U.S. officials were saying about breakthrough cases, hospitalizations, and deaths are pending.

Walensky didn’t respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment that also asked for an unredacted version of the email. Collins didn’t return an inquiry. Fauci couldn’t be reached. The CDC stated that it was looking into when it first became aware of breakthrough cases.

Later Statements

A few months after the email, Walensky went on MSNBC and claimed that data from the CDC and clinical trials “suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus” and “don’t get sick.”

The CDC has been unable to provide citations supporting the claim. No vaccine is 100 percent effective, experts have told The Epoch Times. There were infections in both the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials among the vaccinated, although the efficacy of the shots against symptomatic infection from seven days after dose two was estimated to be north of 90 percent.

There were also severe cases in the trials among the vaccinated, including some not counted by Pfizer.

The trials weren’t designed to measure efficacy against transmission and didn’t provide evidence of such efficacy, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“The paper that Walensky discussed with Francis Collins explicitly worried about the possibility of ‘breakthrough’ infections caused by variants. It even addressed a variant circulating outside the U.S. that the authors could not say was causing breakthrough cases in January 2021,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of health policy at Stanford University, told The Epoch Times in an email.

“Given that uncertainty, the CDC director should never have endorsed the idea that the COVID vaccines could be used to stop COVID disease spread without definitive proof that they did—proof that she never had. And she should never have endorsed vaccine mandates for a non-sterilizing vaccine.”

Fauci and other top officials had, in 2020 before the email, backed harsh measures during the Trump administration to try to curb the spread of COVID-19, including the forced closure of businesses and schools.

Bhattacharya co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which called for the United States to largely rescind restrictions on healthy people and focus on protecting vulnerable populations. Walensky, then not yet the CDC director, co-signed a competing declaration called the John Snow Memorandum that stated that there was no evidence of sustained post-infection immunity and called for keeping the current strategies in place.

Fauci and Walensky were also among the officials who supported vaccine mandates that were imposed by President Joe Biden’s administration in the fall of 2021. And Fauci that year claimed on CBS that people who received a vaccine would “become a dead end to the virus.”

“When there are a lot of dead ends around, the virus is not going to go anywhere,” he said at the time.

Daniel Halperin, an adjunct professor at the Gillings School of Global Public Health at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, told The Epoch Times that the newly revealed email confirms that top officials knew about the prospect of breakthrough cases becoming more prevalent.

“It further calls into question why officials claimed that people who get vaccinated not only are protecting themselves but are also virtually immune from getting infected or transmitting the virus to others,” Halperin said in an email.

Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.), a doctor, told The Epoch Times via email that the officials were “deliberately misrepresenting what they knew to the American people,” noting that he would “continue to fight for transparency and accountability so that the mistakes and abuses of the last three years are never allowed to happen again.”

Both Fauci and Walensky later became infected with COVID-19 despite being vaccinated. The government said the officials experienced mild symptoms. Both took Pfizer’s Paxlovid pill for treatment and eventually recovered.

Walensky has, in recent months, claimed that her statements in early 2021 were correct. Asked for citations for the claim, Walensky’s press secretary, Jason McDonald, provided four studies, including two published by the CDC’s quasi-journal. None found 100 percent protection against symptomatic infection or transmission. Walensky has acknowledged that vaccinated people, as newer variants emerged, could transmit COVID-19 and experience symptoms.

CDC Information on Breakthrough Metrics

Walensky and Fauci did talk about breakthrough cases about two weeks after the email.

They said on Feb. 17, 2021, that early data indicated that new variants were more transmissible and said their agencies were working with state and local officials to investigate breakthrough cases.

[…]

Some states reported breakthrough cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in early 2021. The CDC didn’t start providing them until April 15, 2021. The agency stated at the time that 5,814 people who had received two doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, or the single-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine, still tested positive. Nearly 400 of them were hospitalized and 74 died.

[…]

Via https://www.theepochtimes.com/cdc-director-concerned-about-breakthrough-cases-weeks-after-covid-vaccine-rollout-email_5352197.html

Óscar Cabrera Adames photo credit: FedombalRD/Twitter

Zero Hedge

While the American healthcare industry is happy to give confused children puberty blockers and lop off various offending body parts, the European medical community is having second thoughts.

According to the Wall Street Journal, five countries – the U.K., Sweden, Finland, Norway and France – are now cautioning doctors to exercise caution in their treatment of minors, citing a lack of evidence that the benefits of transgender therapy outweigh the risks.

Earlier this month, the UK’s National Health Services restricted the use of puberty blockers to clinical trials, effectively banning their use in children.

“These countries have done systematic reviews of evidence,” said transgender care researcher Leor Sapir at the right-leaning Manhattan Institute think tank. “They’ve found that the studies cited to support these medical interventions are too unreliable, and the risks are too serious.”

American politicians have taken notice

“It’s beneficial to see European countries coming to their senses,” said Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) in an interview, referring to the UK’s systematic evidentiary reviews of puberty blockers. According to the report, Republicans plan to make transgender-care issues part of their 2024 election platform.

“This is the issue of our time. This is a hill we’re gonna die on,” said Crenshaw.

Democrats, meanwhile, say Republicans are simply scoring cheap political points.

“They are telling parents that Republican politicians know better than they do what is best for their child,” said Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ), echoing comments made by former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R).

According to a poll taken late last year and published in May by the Washington Post and KFF, 68% of respondents oppose the use of puberty blockers in children aged 10-14. Since then, over a dozen GOP-run states have restricted medical interventions as part of transgender care – including Texas, which will yank a doctor’s license for providing puberty blockers, surgeries or hormone treatments to most transgender minors.

The U.S. medical community hasn’t wavered in its support for medical interventions and continues to recommend puberty blockers and hormones for minors as a clinical option. Unlike the concerns expressed by many authorities in Europe, U.S. medical associations often treat the science behind such medical interventions as settled.

Last week, delegates at the annual meeting of the American Medical Association endorsed a resolution—co-sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinology and others—that reiterated support for access to medical interventions, saying that GOP claims about transgender care “do not reflect the research landscape.” -WSJ

On the other hand, blue states such as New York have issued guidance allowing teachers to keep a child’s gender transition a secret from their parents. According to the guidance, some students “have not talked to their families about their gender identity because of safety concerns or lack of acceptance and may begin their transition at school without parent/guardian knowledge.”

Of course, this is a big business we’re talking about, so we’ll see how this plays out.

[…]

Via https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/europe-does-about-face-transgender-therapy-children

Drug Use for Grown-Ups

Dr Carl L Hart

Penguin Putnam (2021)

Book Review

Hart, an African American psychology professor at Columbia University, has spent decades researching the effect of illicit drugs on a broad cross-section of users and non-users. Based on this research, he makes a compelling case that all illicit drugs are more beneficial than harmful and should be legalized. In his studies (of cannabis, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and psilocybin), small doses of each consistently produced feelings of altruism, empathy, focus and tranquility in nearly all his subjects. They also reported a feeling a greater sense of purpose and meaning and improved sexual intimacy and performance.*

At the same time, Hart cautions that recreational drugs are likely to produce unwanted effects in people with psychiatric illness or in acute crisis. Likewise he also recommends using recreational drugs (and alcohol) in a responsible “adult” way that doesn’t interfere with family, work and social responsibilities.

According to Hart, the US has a long proud history of using opium, cocaine and cannabis and for medical conditions. Jefferson was avid long term drug user for both medicinal and mind altering purposes. Freud was a heavy cocaine user. In the US, the main opioid (opium or morphine) users were middle aged white women, with few adverse effects. Cocaine use was actively encouraged among (Black and white) laborers because it increased their productivity.

Since Nixon first declared a War on Drugs in 1971, its budget has increased from 1.5 to 35 billion, illicit drugs remain as plentiful as ever and the US prison population has grown to over two billion. In 2021 when the book was published, 32 million Americans reported using at least one drug in the past month. Owing to differential police enforcement, the vast majority of people incarcerated for drug possession are Black or Hispanic, while the vast majority of drug users (and dealers) are white.

Marijuana

Extensive research suggests marijuana is beneficial for AIDS wasting syndrome, neuropathic pain, chronic main and spasticity due to multiple sclerosis, Thirty-two states have legalized its use for specific medical conditions. At the same, there is no reliable evidence that it causes brain damage, that  it’s a gateway drug to more dangerous drug or impairs reasoning or abstracting thinking (as is frequently claimed).

Cocaine and Crack

Cocaine, the origin of modern lidocaine, was the the first local anesthetic During the 1986-88 crack cocaine hysteria, the majority of crack users were white and for the most part they were offered treatment. Black people who used it were arrested and given five-year sentences.

Opiates

Opiates have long been used medically for treatment of pain. Heroin can be lifesaving n regions with endemic dysentery. Only 1/4 of opioid-related overdose involve a single drug. In 3/4 of case, the opium is contaminated and/or combined with a downers, such as alcohol, a tranquilizer or antihistamine. Fentanyl overdoses are common because naive street users underestimate how potent it is compared to heroin. Hart strongly advocates for free drug safety testing (widely available outside the US), which allows users to ascertain whether their street heroin has dangerous contaminants. The severity of opiate withdrawal (which unlike alcohol withdrawal is almost never fatal) has been grossly exaggerated.

Amphetamine

Contrary to common propaganda, there’s no reliable peer reviewed evidence that amphetamines cause brain damage.

Psychodelics

Hart is highly critical of wealthy “psychonauts” who advocate for legalization of psychodelics (ie their drug of choice). He decries the myth of PCP causing superhuman strength in black males (which is totally unsupported by research), which police sometimes use an excuse to gun down black males. He also advocates for more research into the use of ketamine, psilocybin and LSD microdosing in depression.

In my view, Hart argues very persuasively for the legalization (which would end prosecution of drug dealers). Portugal and Brazil have decriminalized all recreational drugs. However their continued prosecution of drug dealers continues to result in mass incarceration of poor minority populations.

*Hart tried each of these drugs himself and had a similar reaction. He also deliberately put himself through heroin withdrawal, which was fairly benign except for excruciating abdominal pain, which he eventually relieved by snorting 0.5 mg of the sleeping medication triazolam (Halcion). At present he uses heroin (snorting) or alcohol occasionally, finding both protective against the negative health consequences of “negotiating pathology producing environments.” He reports heroin as being particularly helpful in warding off the flu or other respiratory infections.

(The Canadian Press/Jeff McIntosh)

By Matthew Horwood

EXCLUSIVE: Over 300 CAF Members Launch $500 Million Lawsuit Against Military for COVID Vaccine Mandates

Around 330 active or former members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) who say they were harmed by COVID-19 vaccine mandates have filed a class-action lawsuit against high-ranking members of the Canadian military, asking for some $500 million in damages.

“The CAF shirked its own purpose and rushed an untested product onto its members, mislabeled this experimental gene therapy a ‘vaccine,’ knowingly made false statements of safety and efficacy, and facilitated its mandate with no option to refuse except for mandatory permanent removal from service,” reads the statement of claim filed with the Federal Court on June 21.

“The actions of the CAF and CDS [Chief of the Defence Staff] has resulted in injury to the Plaintiffs, who have consistently worked to prevent this abuse of power from occurring and to protect the members and their families who are experiencing coercion, discrimination, and threat of loss of career and benefits in all instances.”

https://19ffd5b95edd7f3f11a48679aa85bc19.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-40/html/container.html

The lawsuit was filed against Chief of the Defence Staff General Wayne Eyre, Vice Chief of the Defence Staff Lieutenant-General Frances Allen, Minister of National Defence Anita Anand, former deputy minister of national defence Jody Thomas, and others.

In the fall of 2021, the CAF imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate, with non-compliance subsequently leading to the loss of hundreds of members. They left through either voluntary release or expulsion under code 5(f), “unsuitable for further service,” a dishonourable discharge reserved for soldiers with “personal weaknesses” or other issues deemed to impose an excessive burden on the CAF.

The CAF lightened the vaccine mandate in October 2022 by removing COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of service, but it kept in place a mandatory primary series of injections for numerous operational roles.

Orders

The lawsuit claims that the CAF abused its power by ignoring express legislative limits on its actions, allowing the physical and/or psychological torture of unvaccinated members under the command of CAF-commissioned officers, ignoring established law on the right to privacy and the right to choose medical treatment, and ignoring established law on informed consent and regarding religious and spiritual belief.

Other alleged abuses listed include deliberately failing to ensure officers were fully and correctly briefed on all legal and policy issues related to vaccine mandates and deliberately misusing the grievance system to indefinitely delay or stop relief sought by the members.

The lawsuit states that the CAF focused on “political agendas and taking direction from political leaders that is detrimental to operational readiness and effectiveness” when it implemented the COVID-19 vaccine mandates. It said the CAF gave the plaintiffs no way to meet the mandate by writing the directives in a way that blocked any possible means of complying with them.

The statement of the claim adds the allegation that the CDS used administrative measures to punish those who refused or could not comply, instead of following the legal process under the National Defence Act that would allow members to have their cases heard in independent hearings.

In addition, it said the CDS had full control over the grievance process, which meant members were denied fundamental justice.

Further, the lawsuit said Eyre stated he received orders from the government of Canada (GC) to enforce the vaccine mandate, which the statement of claim argues is unlawful.

The lawsuit says members faced severe consequences, including loss of career and loss of employment opportunities outside the CAF, along with loss of income, retirement pension, benefits, travel, and even basic participation in work or public life as a result of non-compliance with the vaccine mandates.

Moreover, the lawsuit says coercive actions were allegedly taken by commanding officers to force compliance. Examples given in the lawsuit include “forcing members to spend unnecessary extended periods of time outside in extreme winter conditions with no shelter or protection as well as forcibly confining members to small, cramped spaces with no respite for meals or personal hygiene needs.”

Daniel Le Bouthillier, head of media relations for the Department of National Defence, said that as a matter of process, “we do not comment on potential legal actions of this nature.”

Charter Rights

The lawsuit also alleged that the CAF vaccine directives violated the plaintiffs’ rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

It said the CAF breached Section 2(a) by violating their freedom of conscience and religion, Section 2(d) by violating their right to associate in collective action and achieve workplace goals, Section 7 by infringing upon their right to liberty and security of the person, Section 8 by violating their right to privacy, and Section 15 by violating their right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination.

The plaintiffs also argued that the requirement to disclose private medical information intruded upon their private affairs, and that a “reasonable person would regard this intrusion as highly offensive and causative of distress, humiliation and/or anguish.”

On May 30, an independent military administrative tribunal found that the CAF’s vaccine mandate violated the Section 7 charter rights of members who refused vaccination.

“I conclude that the limitation of the grievors’ right to liberty and security of the person by the CAF vaccination policy is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice because the policy, in some aspects, is arbitrary, overly broad and disproportionate,” wrote Nina Frid of the Military Grievances External Review Committee.

Alberta-based lawyer Catherine Christensen of Valour Law, which specializes in military law, filed the class-action lawsuit on behalf of the CAF members. She said the lawsuit amounts to approximately $1,000,000 for each of the plaintiffs plus “extensive other damages. Essentially, a lawsuit for about $500,000,000.”

The plaintiffs are the “tip of the spear in making the CAF and GC accountable for the past 3 years of tyranny,” she told The Epoch Times via email on June 23.

“The CDS issued an unlawful order that cost thousands of our dedicated military members to lose their careers,” she said. “He must now answer to the Court for his actions.”

Via https://peckford42.wordpress.com/2023/06/24/canadas-military-members-take-legal-action-against-their-bosses/