Connect with us

Government

Fauci’s War on Science: The Smoking Gun

Fauci’s War on Science: The Smoking Gun

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

Those weeks following the release of the Great Barrington Declaration did feel odd…

On the good side, medical doctors, scientists, public..

Published

on

Fauci's War on Science: The Smoking Gun

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

Those weeks following the release of the Great Barrington Declaration did feel odd...

On the good side, medical doctors, scientists, public health workers, and citizens all over the world were thrilled that three top scholars in fields of public health and epidemiology had spoken out against lockdowns and for a reasoned approach to Covid. They eagerly signed the document. 

Yes, there were some attempts to sabotage it too, with fake names and so on, which should have been a clue about what was coming. The fakes were deleted in days and new methods of confirming signatures were deployed. 

The document, on the one hand, said nothing controversial. The right way to deal with this pandemic, it said, was to focus on those who could face severe outcomes from disease – a very plain point and nothing new. There was nothing to be gained by locking down the whole of society because of a pathogen with such a huge differential in its demographic impact. 

The virus would have to become endemic in any case (including the realization of “herd immunity,” which is not a “strategy” but a descriptive term widely accepted in epidemiology) and certainly would not be stopped by destroying peoples’ lives and liberties. 

The hope of the Declaration was simply that journalists would pay attention to a different point of view and a debate would begin on the unprecedented experiment in lockdowns. Perhaps science could prevail, even in this climate. 

On the bad side, and at the very same time, following the release, the attacks began pouring in, and they were brutal, structured to destroy. The three main signers – Sunetra Gupta (Oxford), Martin Kulldorff (Harvard), and Jay Bhattacharya (Stanford) – made the statement as a matter of principle. It was also born of frustration with the prevailing narrative. 

Mostly this declaration was intended as an educational effort. But the authors were being called vicious names and treated like heretics that should be burned. There certainly was no civil debate; quite the contrary. 

It was all quite shocking given that the Declaration was a statement concerning what almost everyone in these professional circles believed earlier in the year. They were merely stating the consensus based on science and experience. Nothing more. Even on March 2, 2020, 850 scientists signed a letter to the White House warning against lockdowns, closures, and travel restrictions. It was sponsored by Yale University. Today it reads nearly like a first draft of the Great Barrington Declaration. Indeed on that same day, Fauci wrote to a Washington Post reporter: “The epidemic will gradually decline and stop on its own without a vaccine.”

But following the March 13-16, 2020 lockdowns, the orthodoxy had evidently changed. And suddenly. The signers of the GBD had declined to change with it. Thus did they endure astonishingly brutal smears. What felt odd at the time was the sheer intensity of the attacks, as well as their dogmatism and ferocity. These attacks also had a strong political flavor that had little regard for science. 

Already by the summer, it was very clear that the lockdowns had not achieved what they were supposed to achieve. Two weeks had stretched into many months, and the data on cases and deaths were uncorrelated with the “mitigation measures” that had been imposed on the country and the world. Meanwhile, millions had missed cancer screenings, schools and churches had been shut, public health was in a state of crisis, and small businesses and communities were fighting to stay alive. 

It was obvious on October 4, 2020, when the Declaration was released, that it was a correct statement and that the lockdowns had failed by every measure. Following Trump’s fatal March 2020 decision to acquiesce to Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, the president had pushed for reopening the country and treating this pathogen as a disease with normal medical methods. He was not making much headway, however. The handful of people around Trump who had been responsible for pushing them were digging in, prepared to wage a full war on dissent. 

What historian Phil Magness has discovered, with newly unearthed emails, comes not as a shock to any of us but it is satisfying to see the confirmation of what we suspected. It seemed at the time that the effort to attack and destroy both the GBD and its authors was coordinated from the top. Here at last is the proof that our intuition was not crazy. 

The author of the initial email is Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health. The recipients were Anthony Fauci and H. Clifford Lane, NIAID Deputy Director for Clinical Research and Special Projects.The email calls for a “published take down” of the GBD that is both “quick and devastating.”

That evening, Fauci wrote back, not with a reference to any scientific papers supporting lockdowns and so on but with a piece from the gadget publication called Wired, which said the GBD is wrong because “quite literally arguing with the past” because the lockdowns are no longer being used. Collins responded: “excellent.”

The next day, Fauci struck again with an article from the pro-lockdown leftist newspaper The Nation. It’s a demoralizing reference simply because the public was led to believe that between his endless TV interviews, Fauci was scouring “the science” to find out more about SARS-CoV-2, not googling and landing on highly politicized and ideological webzines. What we find in these emails are highly political people who are obsessed not with science but with messaging and popular influences on the public mind.

Days later, Collins himself gave quotes to the Washington Post that ridiculed the position that society should reopen. He was clearly attacking Trump and the White House generally. Fauci said not to worry about it because they were too busy with other things, e.g. the election. 

Over the following weeks, many new pieces appeared in the popular press. These gentlemen eagerly shared them. 

What do we learn from these emails?

The attacks on tens of thousands of medical professionals and scientists were indeed encouraged from the top. The basis for the attacks were not scientific articles. They were heavily political popular pieces. This adds serious weight to the impression we all had at the time, which was that this was not really about science but about something far more insidious. 

You can discover more about this in Scott Atlas’s book on the topic. These new emails confirm his account. It was an outright war on top scientists, people whose views on matters of public health were not different from the professional consensus only earlier in the year. For that matter, Anthony Fauci himself warned against lockdowns in January and February, favoring instead normal methods of mitigation. 

My own estimate is that the convinced advocates of lockdowns when they took place were probably fewer than 50 in the US. How and why they managed to grab hold of the reins of power will be investigated by historians for many decades. The incredibly positive response to the Great Barrington Declaration, which has garnered 900,000 signatures in the meantime, demonstrates that there was and is still life remaining in traditional public health measures deployed throughout the 20th century and still respect for human dignity and science remaining among medical professionals and the general public. 

Please remember that Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins are not just two scientists among hundreds of thousands. As the NIH site says, it “invests about $41.7 billion annually in medical research for the American people.” With that kind of spending power, you can wield a great deal of influence, even to the point of crushing dissent, however rooted in serious science the target might be. It might be enough power and influence to achieve the seemingly impossible, such as conducting a despotic experiment without precedent, under the cover of virus control, in overturning law, tradition, rights, and liberties hard won from hundreds of years of human experience. 

This war on dissent against lockdowns is not only a scandal of our times. The lockdowns and now the mandates have fundamentally transformed society and its relationship to government, technology, media, and much more. The emergency continues. Protests have arisen the world over but they are hardly even covered by the media. We seem ever more to be on the precipice of total disaster, one that will be difficult to reverse. It is urgent that we know who did this, as well as how and why, and take steps to stop it before more damage is done and then becomes permanent. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/20/2021 - 18:20

Read More

Continue Reading

International

UK’s Johnson Urges Talks As Unions Threaten “Biggest Rail Strike In Modern History”

UK’s Johnson Urges Talks As Unions Threaten "Biggest Rail Strike In Modern History"

Authored by Alexander Zhang via The Epoch Times,

British…

Published

on

UK's Johnson Urges Talks As Unions Threaten "Biggest Rail Strike In Modern History"

Authored by Alexander Zhang via The Epoch Times,

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has urged rail unions to talk to the government before causing “irreparable damage” with strike action.

The National Union of Rail, Maritime, and Transport Workers (RMT) is holding a ballot of its 40,000 members on plans to strike over jobs, pay, and conditions. The ballot is set to close on Tuesday, and the union has claimed that a yes vote could lead to “the biggest rail strike in modern history.”

Another union, the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA), has also warned of a “summer of discontent” with similar action on the way unless pay disputes are resolved.

The prime minister’s official spokesman said on Monday:

“Railways are going through difficult times with passenger numbers down. We need to make sure they’re fit for the future.”

He said the government wants “a fair deal for staff, for passengers, and taxpayers” so that “money isn’t taken away from other essential services” such as the National Health Service.

“The prime minister is firmly of the view that unions should talk to the government before causing irreparable damage to our railways—strikes should be the last resort not the first,” he added.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps told The Sunday Telegraph that ministers are looking at drawing up laws which would make industrial action illegal unless a certain number of staff are working.

Shapps said the government hopes the unions will “wake up and smell the coffee” and suggested that strikes could put more people off rail travel.

He also accused unions of going straight to industrial action rather than using it as a last resort, adding that railways were already on “financial life support” because of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic.

Referring to a pledge in the Conservative Party’s 2019 election manifesto, which promised minimum services during rail strikes, he said:

“We had a pledge in there about minimum service levels. If they really got to that point then minimum service levels would be a way to work towards protecting those freight routes and those sorts of things.”

Unions have reacted to the threat with anger.

RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch said, “Any attempt by Grant Shapps to make effective strike action illegal on the railways will be met with the fiercest resistance from RMT and the wider trade union movement.”

He said the government needs to “focus all their efforts on finding a just settlement” to the rail dispute rather than “attack the democratic rights of working people.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/24/2022 - 02:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

CytoDyn Inc (OTCMKTS: CYDY) On the Comeback Trail (HIV Leronlimab Update)

CytoDyn Inc (OTCMKTS: CYDY) continues to move steadily higher in recent trading since hitting lows of $0.231 after the FDA placed a partial clinical hold…

Published

on

CytoDyn Inc (OTCMKTS: CYDY) continues to move steadily higher in recent trading since hitting lows of $0.231 after the FDA placed a partial clinical hold on the Company’s HIV program and a full clinical hold on its COVID-19 program in the United States. CYDY was one of the biggest runners of 2020 skyrocketing from pennies to $10 per share and MIcrocapdaily covered the stock regularly back in those exciting times. Since than CYDY has been downward bound, first suffering from the Citron short attack and more recently the March 30 drop after the FDA hold. Further, CytoDyn elected to pause its Brazil COVID-19 trials pending results from its previously scheduled data safety monitoring committee meeting and is in the process of reevaluating the timing of its HIV BLA resubmission. CYDY saw further declines after the Company’s CEO and registered public accounting firm, Warren Averett LLC, both resigned. 

On May 23 CYDY reached a non-cash settlement with its former Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Richard Pestell. The Company will release to Dr. Pestell 8.3 million shares of CYDY held in escrow, transfer to Dr. Pestell the assets acquired from ProstaGene LLC and subsequently written-off by the Company and issue a warrant at an exercise price of $0.37 per share to Dr. Pestell for seven million shares of the Company’s common stock. Dr. Pestell and the Company are also exploring ways in which Dr. Pestell can reengage with the Company to help realize Leronlimab’s full potential in oncology. This is an important step forward for CytoDyn as any potential suitor would want the current management to clear the deck of lawsuits before initiating a buyout or partnership. Also, an all-stock settlement shows a lot of faith in the Company from Dr. Pestell who make come back. At this point Cytodyn must find a sponsor or partner to get Leronmilab back on track for HIV. 

The underlying science of Leronmilab has not changed; leronlimab has demonstrated significant potential to attack a number of diseases including cancer, and HIV.  Considering how fast CYDY dropped the bounce potential here is significant and when CYDY does make a definitive move northbound the stock could make rapid gains in a very shorty time period. Management remains hopeful the FDA will review the case and stop the hold of Leronlimab. 

Sign Up now for our 100% FREE Penny Stock Newsletter

CytoDyn Inc (OTCMKTS: CYDY) is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development and commercialization of leronlimab, an investigational humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody (mAb) that is designed to bind to C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5), a protein on the surface of certain immune system cells that is believed to play a role in numerous disease processes. CytoDyn is studying leronlimab in multiple therapeutic areas, including infectious disease, cancer, and autoimmune conditions. 

In January Cytodyn reported positive results from the 350 mg weekly dose of its Phase 2 NASH clinical trial. The trial was conducted in two parts. Part 1 compared a 700 mg weekly dose and placebo in a double-blind randomized manner and Part 2 evaluated a 350 mg weekly dose as an open label study compared to the same placebo blinded arm. Results of the topline report will be announced when available.  

The pre-clinical and clinical development of PRO 140 was led by Progenics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. through 2011. The Company acquired the asset from Progenics in October 2012. In February 2018, CYDY announced it had met the primary endpoint in its Phase 3 trial for leronlimab as a combination therapy with HAART for highly treatment-experienced HIV patients and first submitted the non-clinical portion of the Company’s Biologics License Application (“BLA”) to the FDA in March 2019.  

To Find out the inside Scoop on CYDY Subscribe to Microcapdaily.com Right Now by entering your Email in the box below

CYDY

Cytodyns current business strategy is to resubmit its BLA to the FDA as soon as possible, to finalize with the FDA our submitted protocol for a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial with leronlimab as a monotherapy for HIV patients, to seek emergency use authorization and approval for leronlimab as a potential therapeutic benefit for COVID-19 patients with mild-to-moderate, severe-to-critical, and long-haulers indications in the U.S., Brazil, and other countries, to advance the Company’s clinical trials with leronlimab for various forms of cancer, including, among others, the Phase 2 clinical trial for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and Phase 2 basket trial for 22 solid tumor cancers, to complete the Phase 2 trial for liver fibrosis associated with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (“NASH”), and to explore other cancer and immunologic indications for leronlimab.  

On May 23 CYDY announced it has reached a non-cash settlement with its former Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Richard Pestell, concerning an ongoing legal dispute related to his former employment with the Company. 

Under the terms of the agreement, the parties will release each other of all claims, and the Company will release to Dr. Pestell 8.3 million shares of the Company’s common stock held in escrow, transfer to Dr. Pestell the assets acquired from ProstaGene LLC and subsequently written-off by the Company and issue a warrant at an exercise price of $0.37 per share to Dr. Pestell for seven million shares of the Company’s common stock. Dr. Pestell and the Company are also exploring ways in which Dr. Pestell can reengage with the Company to help realize leronlimab’s full potential in oncology. CytoDyn regrets Dr. Pestell’s departure from the Company and the subsequent public statements made by its former CEO about Dr. Pestell. 

Dr. Pestell has published more than 600 works, is the most frequently cited scientist in the field of cell-cycle control and was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia in the 2019 Queen’s Birthday Honours for distinguished service to medicine and medical education. He has served on editorial boards of six journals, was the Director of two NCI-designated Cancer Centers and has founded several biotechnology companies. He serves as an advisor and reviewer for a number of domestic and international research centers, including NCI cancer centers. 

For More on CYDY Subscribe Right Now!

Currently trading at a $226 million market valuation CYDY is an SEC filer and is fully reporting OTCQB. The Company has close to $100 million in assets and about that in debt. At current price levels CYDY is worth a close look; CYDY was one of the biggest runners of 2020 skyrocketing from pennies to $10 per share. While there are plenty of ricks not to mention the CEO and accounting firm resigning CYDY is moving northbound now and looks to be coming back. The underlying science has not changed; Leronlimab has demonstrated significant potential to attack a number of diseases including cancer and HIV.  Considering how fast CYDY dropped the bounce potential here is significant and when CYDY does make a definitive move northbound the stock could make rapid gains in a very shorty time period. Management remains hopeful the FDA will review the case and stop the hold of Leronlimab. We will be updating on CYDY when more details emerge so make sure you are subscribed to Microcapdaily so you know what’s going on with CYDY.

Sign Up now for our 100% FREE Penny Stock Newsletter

Disclosure: we hold no position in CYDY either long or short and we have not been compensated for this article.

The post CytoDyn Inc (OTCMKTS: CYDY) On the Comeback Trail (HIV Leronlimab Update) first appeared on Micro Cap Daily.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Immigration Disappears From Kamala Harris’ Public Schedule

Immigration Disappears From Kamala Harris’ Public Schedule

Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClear Politics (emphasis ours),

It was her…

Published

on

Immigration Disappears From Kamala Harris' Public Schedule

Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClear Politics (emphasis ours),

It was her first overseas trip, and Vice President Harris, recently deputized to address what the White House calls “the root causes of migration,” was in Guatemala trying to break through with a simple message. “Do not come,” Harris told would-be migrants last June. “Do not come. The United States will continue to enforce our laws and secure our borders.”

(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

They did not listen, or if any migrants did hear Harris last year, many ignored her message. Just last month, according to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, 234,088 migrants were apprehended at the southern border, the highest mark ever recorded.

Asked that same month if President Biden had confidence in Harris and her ability to handle the situation, then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki replied, “he absolutely does.” But as the flow of migrants accelerates across the southern border, immigration has disappeared from the vice president’s public schedule.

A compilation of that schedule by the Los Angeles Times, reviewed by RealClearPolitics, shows that Harris has not hosted an immigration-specific event since last summer. The last one, a meeting with Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander leaders in the White House last August, touched briefly on immigration.

White House officials dispute any characterization that Harris’ public schedule tells the whole story. “The vice president continues to lead implementation of the Root Causes Strategy and has been engaging with Cabinet and other Administration officials on this effort,” Harris’ Press Secretary Kirsten Allen told RCP.

Addressing the challenge remains part of the vice president’s policy portfolio. She leads top-level meetings that are not always made public, and she has taken point in diplomatic efforts in the region. For instance, it was Harris who traveled to Honduras for the inauguration of President Xiomara Castro in January. Administration officials hoped to find a new ally in that executive, someone who would help stem the flow of the millions of people heading north through Central America to the southern border. According to an official White House readout, Harris and Castro discussed “a broad range of issues.” Among them migration, but also coronavirus and the economy as well as corruption and gender-based violence.

Despite those efforts, the influx has not slowed, and Biden is expected to end enforcement of Title 42, the pandemic policy that allowed Border Patrol to turn away hundreds of thousands of migrants on public health grounds. Warnings from some Democrats in border states, including Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar, have gone unheeded.

The Department of Homeland Security is bracing for more record-breaking numbers at the border, and NBC News reports that there is concern in the department that they won’t have enough funding to address a surge if Title 42 is lifted, compounding a challenge that Biden has faced since the beginning of his presidency.

As the number of interdictions started to rise and chaotic images from the southern border flooded cable news, concern grew, even among Democrats. Biden’s own pollsters, the New York Times reported, warned that the issue was “a growing vulnerability." Biden still insisted that he could get the situation under control, albeit with divine intervention.

“Is there a crisis at the border?” RCP asked the president as he walked out of the East Room of the White House after a speech last March.

“No,” Biden replied over his shoulder. “We’ll be able to handle it,” he said while walking side-by-side with Harris. “God willing.”

Two weeks later, the Associated Press reported at the time, Biden tapped Harris to lead the administration efforts to tackle the migration challenge at the southern border and work with Central American nations to address root causes of the problem. Republicans were eager to assign blame and dubbed Harris “border czar.”

The vice president rejected that framing and sought to clarify her mission. As the White House press secretary explained to reporters last March, Harris “will be helping lead that effort, specifically the root causes – not the border,” admitting that there has been “some confusion over that.”

The president was also confused: When Biden and Harris met with the Congressional Black Caucus in April that year, he praised his vice president, saying she would do “a hell of a job” handling immigration, according to a new book by New York Times’ reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns. But Harris corrected him then and there, the two write. “Excuse me,” she said, “it's the Northern Triangle – not immigration.”

Biden eventually clarified the mission. “It’s not her full responsibility,” he later told reporters, but “when she speaks, she speaks for me.”

Whether she wanted the job or not, Harris embraced the challenge. She has made three trips to the region, and she traveled to the southern border to hear directly from Border Patrol. The vice president has met both with law enforcement and migrant groups, stressing all the while that the question “cannot be reduced to a political issue.”

Politics were there from the beginning though, and some feared that deputizing Harris to tackle such a mammoth challenge ran the risk of unfairly saddling her with a thankless mission for which there is no easy solution. “She is qualified to do the job,” Chuck Rocha told RCP of Biden’s decision to turn this part of his policy portfolio over to his vice president. Rocha helmed Latino outreach for Sen. Bernie Sanders in both of that candidate’s presidential bids, and Rocha credited Harris for being “a staunch advocate of the progressive wing of the immigration movement.”

All the same, Rocha warned last year that expectations should be tempered: “It has been an issue that we have been trying to fix for generations, one that I don’t think any one person can totally solve.”

Biden has called on Congress to take up comprehensive immigration reform since he got to the White House. There is no bipartisan appetite on Capitol Hill for the bill that he sent to Congress on his first day in office. The administration has subsequently been left to its own devices, and Harris released a 20-page plan last July to address the problem.

We will build on what works, and we will pivot away from what does not work,” Harris wrote in an introduction to the plan that focuses on creating partnerships with Northern Triangle countries to combat corruption, violence, and poverty.

“It will not be easy, and progress will not be instantaneous,” the vice president warned, “but we are committed to getting it right.” Biden should know. He was deputized by then-President Obama to deal with a similar mission amid an earlier surge of migrants, many of them unaccompanied children. On a tour of Central and South American nations in 2014, he offered U.S. help to root out corruption, provide economic opportunity, and ensure safety in the Northern Triangle nations.

“We have to deal with the root causes,” Vice President Biden told reporters gathered for a press conference in the residence of the U.S. ambassador to Guatemala, echoing the exact phrase his administration now uses eight years later.

Biden understands the challenge, and that tackling it without help from Congress is arduous and thankless, if not impossible.

“I said when we became a team and got elected, that the vice president was going to be the last person in the room,” he joked last March when he announced that Harris would helm the mission. “She didn’t realize that means she gets every assignment.”

“I gave you a tough job, and you’re smiling, but there’s no one better capable of trying to organize this for us,” the president continued after the levity. The vice president didn’t flinch. She thanked him “for having confidence in me.” Then Harris added, “there’s no question that this is a challenging situation.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/23/2022 - 23:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending