Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 56 of 56

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #31
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Jon Jackson: View Post
    Of Course. This is old news for those of us who have been following this story. But Thank you, Doctor Jon Jackson. Truly; thank you.

    “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption.
    Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesivir

    By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

    Global Research, August 24, 2020


    There is an ongoing battle to suppress Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug for the treatment of Covid-19. The campaign against HCQ is carried out through slanderous political statements, media smears, not to mention an authoritative peer reviewed “evaluation” published on May 22nd by The Lancet, which was based on fake figures and test trials.

    The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals Worldwide. The database had been fabricated. The objective was to kill the Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cure on behalf of Big Pharma.

    While The Lancet article was retracted, the media casually blamed “a tiny US based company” named Surgisphere whose employees included “a sci-fi writer and adult content model” for spreading “flawed data” (Guardian). This Chicago based outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests actually took place.

    While the blame was placed on Surgisphere, the unspoken truth (which neither the scientific community nor the media have acknowledged) is that the study was coordinated by Harvard professor Mandeep Mehra under the auspices of Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) which is a partner of the Harvard Medical School.
    When the scam was revealed, Dr. Mandeep Mehra who holds the Harvey Distinguished Chair of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital apologized:

    I have always performed my research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. However, we can never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to our high standards.

    It is now clear to me that in my hope to contribute this research during a time of great need, I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use. For that, and for all the disruptions – both directly and indirectly – I am truly sorry. (emphasis added)

    Mandeep R. Mehra, MD, MSC (official statement on BWH website)

    But that “truly sorry” note was just the tip of the iceberg.

    Studies on Gilead Science’s Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) Were Conducted Simultaneously by Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH)

    While The Lancet report (May 22, 2020) coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra was intended “to kill” the legitimacy of HCQ as a cure of Covid-19, another important (related) study was being carried out (concurrently) at BWH pertaining to Remdesivir on behalf of Gilead Sciences Inc.

    Dr. Francisco Marty, a specialist inInfectious Disease and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School was entrusted with coordination of the clinical trial tests of the antiviral medication Remdesivir under Brigham’s contract with Gilead Sciences Inc:

    Brigham and Women’s Hospital began enrolling patients in two clinical trials for Gilead’s antiviral medication remdesivir. The Brigham is one of multiple clinical trial sites for a Gilead-initiated study of the drug in 600 participants with moderate coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and a Gilead-initiated study of 400 participants with severe COVID-19.

    … If the results are promising, this could lead to FDA approval, and if they aren’t, it gives us critical information in the fight against COVID-19 and allows us to move on to other therapies.”

    While Dr. Mandeep Mehra was not directly involved in the Gilead Remdesevir BWH study under the supervision of his colleague Dr. Francisco Marty, he nonetheless had contacts with Gilead Sciences Inc: “He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate” (France Soir, May 23, 2020)

    What was the intent of his (failed) study? To undermine the legitimacy of Hydroxychloroquine?According to France Soir, in a report published after The Lancet Retraction:

    The often evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, … professor at Harvard Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its results. (France Soir, June 5, 2020)

    Was Dr. Mandeep Mehra in conflict of interest? (That is a matter for BWH and the Harvard Medical School to decide upon).

    Who are the Main Actors?

    Dr. Anthony Fauci, advisor to Donald Trump, portrayed as “America’s top infectious disease expert” has played a key role in smearing the HCQ cure which had been approved years earlier by the CDC as well as providing legitimacy to Gilead’s Remdesivir.

    Dr. Fauci has been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since the Reagan administration. He is known to act as a mouthpiece for Big Pharma.

    Dr. Fauci launched Remdesivir in late June (see details below). According to Fauci, Remdesevir is the “corona wonder drug” developed by Gilead Science Inc. It’s a $1.6 billion dollar bonanza.

    Gilead Sciences Inc: History
    Gilead Sciences Inc is a Multibillion dollar bio-pharmaceutical company which is now involved in developing and marketing Remdesivir. Gilead has a long history. It has the backing of major investment conglomerates including the Vanguard Group and Capital Research & Management Co, among others. It has developed ties with the US Government.

    In 1999 Gilead Sciences Inc, developed Tamiflu (used as a treatment of seasonal influenza and bird flu). At the time, Gilead Sciences Inc was headed by Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). Rumsfeld was responsible for coordinating the illegal and criminal wars on Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

    Rumsfeld maintained his links to Gilead Sciences Inc throughout his tenure as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). According to CNN Money (2005): “The prospect of a bird flu outbreak … was very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [who still owned Gilead stocks] and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences”.

    Anthony Fauci
    has been in charge of the NIAID since 1984, using his position as “a go between” the US government and Big Pharma. During Rumsfeld’s tenure as Secretary of Defense, the budget allocated to bio-terrorism increased substantially, involving contracts with Big Pharma including Gilead Sciences Inc. Anthony Fauci considered that the money allocated to bio-terrorism in early 2002 would:

    “accelerate our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of microbes that can be used in attacks, and the biology of the microbes’ hosts — human beings and their immune systems. One result should be more effective vaccines with less toxicity.” (WPo report)

    In 2008, Dr. Anthony Fauci was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom by president George W. Bush “for his determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer and healthier lives.”

    [ Continues here... ]

    Check out the two Big Pharma Ghouls on the left and
    the right, wha' also gat Medals on that fine day frae W...

    Last edited by Mayacaman; 08-29-2020 at 11:59 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by:

  3. TopTop #32
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Open Letter to Dr. Anthony Fauci Regarding the
    Use of Hydroxychloroquine for Treating COVID-19

    By George C. Fareed, MD Brawley, California
    Michael M. Jacobs, MD, MPH Pensacola, Florida
    Donald C. Pompan, MD Salinas, California

    August 12, 2020

    Anthony Fauci, MD
    National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
    Washington, D.C.

    Dear Dr. Fauci:

    You were placed into the most high-profile role regarding America’s response to the Coronavirus pandemic. Americans have relied on your medical expertise concerning the wearing of masks, resuming employment, returning to school, and of course medical treatment.

    You are largely unchallenged in terms of your medical opinions. You are the de facto “COVID-19 Czar”. This is unusual in the medical profession in which doctors’ opinions are challenged by other physicians in the form of exchanges between doctors at hospitals, medical conferences, as well as debate in medical journals. You render your opinions unchallenged, without formal public opposition from physicians who passionately disagree with you. It is incontestable that the public is best served when opinions and policy are based on the prevailing evidence and science, and able to withstand the scrutiny of medical professionals.

    As experience accrued in treating COVID-19 infections, physicians worldwide discovered that high-risk patients can be treated successfully as an outpatient, within the first 5 to 7 days of the onset of symptoms, with a “cocktail” consisting of hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin (or doxycycline). Multiple scholarly contributions to the literature detail the efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine-based combination treatment.

    Dr. Harvey Risch
    , the renowned Yale epidemiologist, published an article in May 2020 in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled “Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to Pandemic Crisis”. He further published an article in Newsweek in July 2020 for the general public expressing the same conclusions and opinions. Dr. Risch is an expert at evaluating research data and study designs, publishing over 300 articles. Dr Risch’s assessment is that there is unequivocal evidence for the early and safe use of the “HCQ cocktail.” If there are Q-T interval concerns, doxycycline can be substituted for azithromycin as it has activity against RNA viruses without any cardiac effects.

    Yet, you continue to reject the use of hydroxychloroquine, except in a hospital setting in the form of clinical trials, repeatedly emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting its use. Hydroxychloroquine, despite 65 years of use for malaria, and over 40 years for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, with a well-established safety profile, has been deemed by you and the FDA as unsafe for use in the treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 infections. Your opinions have influenced the thinking of physicians and their patients, medical boards, state and federal agencies, pharmacists, hospitals, and just about everyone involved in medical decision making.

    Indeed, your opinions impacted the health of Americans
    , and many aspects of our day-to-day lives including employment and school. Those of us who prescribe hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin/doxycycline believe fervently that early outpatient use would save tens of thousands of lives and enable our country to dramatically alter the response to COVID-19. We advocate for an approach that will reduce fear and allow Americans to get their lives back.
    We hope that our questions compel you to reconsider your current approach to COVID-19 infection,


    [ Continues here... ]
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. Gratitude expressed by:

  5. TopTop #33
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Dr. Fauci and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
    Diseases Use of Foster Children in Developing an HIV Vaccine

    by Faith Dyson

    Faith Dyson recently published an article on Facebook titled:
    What Was Fauci’s Role In Funding Tuskgegee-Like AIDS Experiments On Foster Children In Seven U.S. States

    She relies heavily on the work of investigative journalist Liam Scheff, and his research published in the book, The House That AIDS Built, which can be found online here.

    In 2004 – investigative journalist, Liam Scheff, exposed the fact that hundreds of Foster children at Incarnation Children’s Center [ICC] in NYC were used and abused as lab rats for unsupervised and unrestricted AIDS research and Vaccine studies by Big Pharma and The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [NIAID].

    Years later in separate investigations – 13,878 children were discovered to have been made subject of the same fate during the 1980’s and 1990’s in six other states: Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Colorado and Texas.
    As we found out in our own investigative report back in 2015, Congress knew about these medical experiments being conducted on foster children and conducted a hearing in 2005, with the title “Protections for Foster Children Enrolled in Clinical Trials.”

    The transcript of these hearings used to be on the website, but since we published our article it has been removed. A copy can be found at here.

    When the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives met to examine this problem, Chairman Wally Herger, Representative from California made this statement:

    "Over the last 18 months, this Subcommittee has heard hearings about a number of issues affecting kids in the Federal, State child welfare programs, and this issue is like many of them: It has the potential for being explosive. The child welfare program in the richest, most powerful country in the world is, and has been, often an abysmal failure.

    "Now, we don’t need proof of more of that. We can give you all kinds of examples of it. We know about kids losing their lives in the child welfare system. Practically every State legislature every year deals with one case or another, and everybody wrings their hands, and the problems go on. The kids are sometimes locked up and sometimes starved under the supervision of the agencies. We know the children have been used without proper supervision for drug testing. " (emphasis added)

    The first witness to testify before the House subcommittee was Dr. Donald Young, M.D., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. He provided extensive testimony regarding governmental oversight. Dr. Young concluded his remarks by stating:

    "We continue to address challenges posed by the threat of HIV/AIDS and are committed to basic and clinical research to strengthen the nation’s ability to cope with this infectious disease. The protection of human subjects, including children, in clinical trials has been and will remain a top priority for HHS. HHS is firmly committed to the protection of the rights and welfare of every individual who participates in human research consistent with sound ethical standards and regulatory requirements."
    Later in the hearing, Dr. Young was asked if any changes were needed in regard to foster children and their participation in drug experimentation. Dr. Young stated:

    "We are not aware of any changes that we believe need to be made. If they are identified, we will be very happy to consider them and make a decision as how best to proceed. We share with you the concern about the adequate protection of foster children. At the same time, the opportunity to let them participate and get the advantage of clinical research, if that is theirs and their guardian’s decision."
    It appears that this Congressional hearing, while acknowledging that foster children were being enrolled in HIV/AIDS vaccine trials, did nothing to stop it.

    Liam Scheff details what some of these foster children went through in his book.

    In New York’s Washington Heights is a 4-story brick building called Incarnation Children’s Center (ICC). This former convent houses a revolving stable of children who’ve been removed from their own homes by the Agency for Child Services [ACS]. These children are black, Hispanic and poor.

    Once taken into ICC, the children become subjects of drug trials sponsored by NIAID (National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Disease, a division of the NIH), NICHD (the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) in conjunction with some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies – GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Genentech, Chiron/Biocine and others.

    The drugs being given to the children are toxic – they’re known to cause genetic mutation, organ failure, bone marrow death, bodily deformations, brain damage and fatal skin disorders.

    If the children refuse the drugs, they’re held down and have them force fed. If the children continue to resist, they’re taken to Columbia Presbyterian hospital where a surgeon puts a plastic tube through their abdominal wall into their stomachs. From then on, the drugs are injected directly into their intestines.
    In 2003, two children, ages 6 and 12, had debilitating strokes due to drug toxicities. The 6-year-old went blind. They both died shortly after. Another 14-year old died recently. An 8-year-old boy had two plastic surgeries to remove large, fatty, drug-induced lumps from his neck.

    This isn’t science fiction. This is AIDS research. The children at ICC were born to mothers who tested HIV positive, or who themselves tested positive. However, neither parents nor children were told a crucial fact — HIV tests are extremely inaccurate. The HIV test cross-reacts with nearly seventy commonly-occurring conditions, giving false positive results. These conditions include common colds, herpes, hepatitis, tuberculosis, drug abuse, inoculations and most troublingly, current and prior pregnancy. This is a double inaccuracy, because the factors that cause false positives in pregnant mothers can be passed to their children – who are given the same false diagnosis.

    Most of us have never heard this before. It’s undoubtedly the biggest secret in medicine. However, it’s well known among HIV researchers that HIV tests are extremely inaccurate – but the researchers don’t tell the doctors, and they certainly don’t tell the children at ICC, who serve as test animals for the next generation of AIDS drugs. ICC is run by Columbia University’s Presbyterian Hospital in affiliation with Catholic Home Charities through the Archdiocese of New York.

    Does the issue of “inaccurate tests” sound familiar? It should, because we are seeing the exact same thing today with COVID tests.

    Faith Dyson writes about her reaction after reading Liam Scheff’s reports:

    When I read the report, I was much like the general public – totally ignorant of NIAID; its director, funding, etc. and I doubt at that time there were very many other people who would have known who was in charge of the Agency outside of government bureaucrats, scientists, researchers, activists and possibly those who were affected by ‘the AIDS/HIV virus’.

    What’s interesting to note here is that the source and/or existence of that pandemic is another highly questionable subject, because it appears to mimic the same scenario that accompanies the latest super-bug to attack the world’s population, the Coronavirus.

    In fact – they’re so much alike, one would think the exact same plan had been followed in the production of both epidemics; the older one, AIDS/HIV, using monkeys and the newer one, Corona, using bats. (See link #3 for a shocking revelation re: active viruses in childhood vaccines that cause AIDS, Cancer, and Leukemia plus a host of other diseases and disorders and see #4 for the traumatic details of how the effects are still plaguing our population decades later..

    Therefore – due to the results of the AIDS/HIV epidemic, those most affected by it had been demanding – from the same government Agency and pharmaceutical companies – some sort of treatment, vaccine, drug, etc. to stem the tide of the infection.

    So the big question back then was:

    “Where could Big Pharma and NIAID find lab rats to whom they could offer ‘free medical care’ in the guise of ‘helping to prevent and/or remedy their suffering’ all the while using them in AIDS/HIV drug and vaccine trails – without being bothered from outside interference, the same as was done in the infamous Tuskgegee Syphilis Experiment?” (See link #5.)

    As Liam Scheff uncovered – the answer to their mad scientific prayers was the unsupervised and unprotected wards of the state, a.k.a. ‘Foster children’.

    However – since the newest pandemic has arisen to overshadow all others, and we now have a much larger group of people demanding the same provisions from the same corporations and Government Agency, we all know who is the head of NIAID.

    It’s Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the lead members of the Trump Administration’s White House Coronavirus Task Force addressing the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

    So a recap of the facts we’ve learned from the corona outbreak – in conjunction with the AIDS/HIV funding that spawned the experiments at Incarnation Children’s Center and elsewhere – are as follows:

    1) Dr. Fauci has been the director of NIAID, a division of The Executive Branch of The U.S. Government, since 1984, so he was also director during the Incarnation Children’s Center Experiments,

    2) his NIAID profile states that he still currently “oversees an extensive research portfolio of basic and applied research to prevent, diagnose, and treat established infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, respiratory infections, diarrheal diseases, tuberculosis and malaria as well as emerging diseases such as Ebola and Zika.” (See link #6),

    3) Fauci participates in Gate-sponsored Global Health Conferences and is listed on The Leadership Council for The Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation (See link #7 and #8.), which has a huge stake in the profits from a Vaccine, Contact Tracing, microchipping, and various other technologies,

    4) NIAID illegally outsourced $3.7 Million in U.S. Tax-payer’s money to Chinese scientists in the Wuhan Lab at the center of the Coronavirus outbreak for researching its ‘gain of function’ – after a moratorium had called a halt to all U.S. involvement in such studies. (See link #9.)

    5) Fauci famously predicted in a speech from 2017 at Georgetown University: “[…], but also there will be a surprise outbreak […], and the history of the last 32 years that I’ve been the director of NIAID will tell the next administration that there’s no doubt in anyone’s mind that they will be faced with the challenges that their predecessors were faced with” – in a battle with a pandemic of infectious disease. (See link #10)

    Read the entire article by Faith Dyson here

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. TopTop #34
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    The Battle for Pandemic Sanity:
    Hydroxychloroquine Efficacy vs. Its Suppression

    (Real-World Research vs. Corporate Profits)

    By Elizabeth Woodworth
    Global Research, July 16, 2020

    Covid-19 cases are on the rise again in the U.S. Why are Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID, the FDA, and the CDC so blind to the real-world success of HCQ+azithromycin?

    If this combination is the simple, cheap, safe way to prevent hospitalization, would government agencies, Big Pharma, and the corporate media want to know?

    If yes, then the proposed solution from a prominent Yale epidemiologist would prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths, and help the world to recovery.

    Real-World Research on Hydroxychloroquine

    During February and March of 2020, there was a lot of excitement in the medical community[i] because early indications in China and France seemed to show a cure for people in the early stage of Covid-19. The ancient anti-malarial drug quinine (aka chloroquine, aka hydroxychloroquine, aka HCQ) had been repurposed to show very promising results against Covid-19 when given to outpatients with early symptoms.

    On March 21 all that changed when President Donald Trump tweeted:

    “HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE & AZITHROMYCIN, taken together, have a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine.”[ii]

    HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE & AZITHROMYCIN, taken together, have a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine. The FDA has moved mountains – Thank You! Hopefully they will BOTH (H works better with A, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents)…..
    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 21, 2020

    Hydroxycholoroquine, made from the ancient, cheap, and plentiful anti-malarial drug quinine, had suddenly become highly politicized. Its industry rivals and the media vigorously decried a business president, who, not a doctor, had dashed hopes for a profitable magic-bullet drug by tweeting an almost-free solution.

    On May 22, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), which has been on the WHO list of essential medicines since 1977, was sent into further freefall by a deceptive, industry-backed Lancet article claiming that hydroxychloroquine was causing heart problems in hospitalized Covid patients across six continents.[iii]

    Headlines blared, hydroxychloroquine clinical trials were called off, and the World Health Organization recommended that physicians everywhere stop prescribing HCQ for Covid-19.

    By May 27, Dr. Harvey Risch, Professor of Epidemiology at the Yale Schools of Public Health and Medicine, had confronted this disaster. He issued an urgent call through the top-ranked American Journal of Epidemiology for hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin “to be widely available and promoted immediately for physicians to prescribe.”[iv]

    “Five studies,” he wrote from Yale, “including two controlled clinical trials, had demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy.” Incredibly, this call for immediate action published in America’s top epidemiology journal did not appear in the mainstream news.[v]

    Instead, the opposite occurred. Although international protest drove the Lancet to retract its fraudulent May 22 article on June 4, the retraction made few headlines. In those two short weeks the U.S. media, with one voice, established HCQ as “controversial,” “anecdotal,” and even “dangerous” when paired with Gilead Science’s highly publicized golden goose, remdesivir.

    On May 21, the day before the Lancet’s HCQ attack appeared, the ever-helpful New York Times had issued a timely update of its massive 7,500-word hit piece against Dr. Didier Raoult, the French microbiologist whose published studies in March and April had preceded Yale’s profit-threatening call for sanity.

    What was the Covid-HCQ background in China and France?

    Dr. Didier Raoult, M.D., PhD., age 68, has long been France’s most cited microbiologist. For 35 years he has been professor of infectious diseases at the Aix-Marseille University in Marseille. Twelve years ago he founded, and is director of, the university’s Institute of Emerging Tropical Diseases.

    Raoult is co-author of 2,300 published, peer-reviewed articles, in which he follows classical research standards by stating plagiarism checks, conflict of interest declarations, and funding declarations.

    He is married to a psychiatrist and they have three children. In a July 7 BFM-TV interview he said that his philosophy it to treat patients like family. He also has three laboratories in Senegal, West Africa.

    A vacation village near Marseille in Carry le Rouet was used to quarantine French citizens returning from Wuhan in case they needed treatment. President Macron visited Raoult on April 9.

    What had Raoult learned from China?

    During the early months of the pandemic, Raoult discovered studies from China showing that the repurposed anti-malarial generic drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were found to be effective in arresting the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in vitro (in the laboratory).[vi]

    Further Chinese studies followed, including randomized clinical trials, showing that when administered to patients in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin, during the early days of the infection, their symptoms would most often resolve.[vii]

    It thus seemed that almost anyone with early symptoms who tested positive could benefit from effective, affordable prophylactic treatment.

    Raoult welcomed the people of Marseille for HCQ-azithromycin treatment and they lined up (socially distanced) around the block outside his 200-staff clinic.

    This led to published studies. A first group of 80 patients showed a 50-fold benefit, and a larger group of 1,061 patients showed a similar result while achieving a mortality rate of only 0.5% – and with no cardiac toxicity.[viii]

    Recent HCQ efficacy studies, unreported by the mainstream media

    Two new independent U.S. studies have come to similar conclusions as Dr. Rault in Marseille and Dr. Risch at Yale:

    • On July 1, 2020, the Henry Ford Health System in Southeast Michigan reported that a peer-reviewed retrospective study of 2,541 Detroit cases showed up to 71% mortality reduction in early treatment, using HCQ and azithromycin.[ix]
    • In a June 30, 2020 study, Dr. Takahisa Mikami and his team at the Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai, New York, analyzed the outcomes of 6493 patients who had confirmed Covid-19 and found that hydroxychloroquine decreased the mortality in hospitalized patients.[x]

    The Government arm of the triad

    1. Conflicts of interest: the corporate fox in the government henhouse
    During recent decades, the health role of government, which is to serve and protect its citizens, has been muddied by increasing corporate representation and influence in higher education and on government advisory committees and foundations. The drug industry, for example, funds university research, pours millions into medical schools, has personnel appointments to university faculties, and supplies textbooks to students.

    In 1995 Congress established the private CDC Foundation to support the work of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    In public-private partnerships, there is a thin line between support and conflict of interest. Susan Perry writes of the Gilead Tamiflu scandal in 2015:

    “Unbeknownst to many, the CDC receives substantial industry funding through the CDC Foundation. A spokesperson said that over the past three years the foundation has received an average of about $6.3 [million] from the industry a year, 21% of the foundation’s overall funding. Since 1995 the foundation has received funding from more than 150 corporate “partners,” including Gilead, which holds the patent on oseltamivir [Tamiflu], as well as Genentech and Roche, the drug’s manufacturers.”[xi]
    The creation of the CDC Foundation in 1995 altered the make-up of the highly respected CDC as a purely a tax-supported agency belonging to, and financed by, the people it served.

    Dozens of pharmaceutical companies, including Gilead Sciences Inc., contribute millions of dollars to the CDC Foundation each year.[xii]

    1. Anthony Fauci’s strange position on hydroxychloroquine

    On April 4, a major fight erupted at a meeting of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, when economics advisor Peter Navarro passed around file folders, pointing out that overseas hydroxychloroquine studies showed “clear therapeutic efficacy.” The government’s top infectious diseases specialist, Dr. Anthony Fauci, countered that there was only anecdotal evidence that HCQ works.[xiii]

    The evidence above shows that Fauci was wrong. Navarro was furious and a heated argument ensued.
    As the head of the $5.9 billion National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Fauci should have known better – he should have known about the clinical trials, case reports, and observational studies in the medical literature. And he must certainly have known that it is not ethical to perform placebo-controlled studies during a pandemic: if the drug saves lives, some of the placebo people will die – a point often made by Professor Raoult.

    Nor did Fauci mention real-world treatment guidelines. An April 17 article from the “Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection” shows that government guidelines in Ireland, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt list chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as the first line of defense for mild-to-moderate Covid-19. The U.S. guideline listed only remdesivir as the first-line defense.[xiv]

    Dr. Fauci should have known about, and mentioned, such national guidelines beyond the United States.
    But most particularly, Fauci should have known about the two most critical reasoning aspects regarding hydroxychloroquine:

    It is only recommended with azithromycin or doxycycline, and only in an early illness outpatient setting in order to stop the infection before hospitalization becomes necessary.[xv]

    The studies above show that this is not rocket science. Why is Dr. Fauci still talking about anecdotal evidence?
    Why did he not retract what he told CNN on Wednesday, May 27, referring to what became the May 22 Lancet scandal?


    Last edited by Barry; 09-12-2020 at 01:42 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  7. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  8. TopTop #35
    Barry's Avatar
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    He Was a Science Star.
    Then He Promoted a Questionable Cure for Covid-19.

    The man behind Trump’s favorite unproven treatment has made a great career assailing orthodoxy. His claim of a 100 percent cure rate shocked scientists around the world.

    Didier Raoult.

    By Scott Sayare
    Published May 12, 2020
    Updated May 21, 2020

    See article

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  9. TopTop #36
    Jon Jackson's Avatar
    Jon Jackson

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine


    Thank you for publishing the link to this very interesting article. I'll just repeat here what I've shared elsewhere. We now have ONE good scientific article (by research standards - i.e., double-blind, large study sample, etc.) published very recently on the use of low-dose hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19. There has been *nothing* (i.e., *zero* studies) meeting true research criteria until now. The results of the new study were positive, with a slightly larger percentage of those on hydroxychloroquine doing better and surviving if they were seriously ill. There were more than 8000 patients in this study, which suggests the results are highly reliable. Previous studies ALL had serious design flaws, the treatment doses were much too high, the sample sizes too small, and the conclusions they drew were out of proportion to realistic expectations. This is why many of us were not willing to accept the older information as being true. And we still don't.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  10. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  11. TopTop #37
    M/M's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    The "benefit" of having no viable treatment options for Covid -- for Dr. Fauci, Bill, et al -- is that Covid vaccine can then be MANDATED, despite that being a violation of our Constitutional rights. I'll post this in conspiracy theories as well as it covers many issues that many believe belong there... Excellent short video by an MD, she discusses how mandate would work at about 19+ minutes:
    Will new COVID vaccine make you transhuman?

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Jon Jackson: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  12. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  13. TopTop #38
    Jon Jackson's Avatar
    Jon Jackson

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    These kinds of theories are mind-boggling to me, and involve a kind of science that doesn't exist yet...including the vaccine! I still have my doubts we'll find one that is safe, reliable and effective. And we certainly won't anytime this year. Don't get me wrong, I'm high-risk about COVID, and if and when there is such a vaccine, I WILL take it. But, I won't even consider it in November. And anyway, in this theory about mandatory vaccines - what makes you think that plan will work any better than the mask mandates have worked? The plan is doomed to failure.

    Anyway, as a physician and someone who cares...there is NO advantage to not having treatments that work for COVID. It means hundreds of thousands of people will die. Many hundreds of thousands. People we know. There is NO upside to this. None at all.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  15. TopTop #39
    M/M's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Absolutely I agree w/you: 'there is NO advantage to not having treatments that work for COVID' --
    the only benefit is for those who want vaccine to be mandatory..

    Quote in this theory about mandatory vaccines - what makes you think that plan will work any better than the mask mandates have worked? The plan is doomed to failure.
    I hope you're right..

    There is talk that the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trial was stopped because a woman developed a neurological inflammation - transverse myelitis - and lost sensation in her hands/feet. It appears that this may be suppressed and trials resumed soon:

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Jon Jackson: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  16. Gratitude expressed by:

  17. TopTop #40
    podfish's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote There is talk that the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trial was stopped because a woman developed a neurological inflammation - transverse myelitis - and lost sensation in her hands/feet. It appears that this may be suppressed and trials resumed soon
    to channel Inigo Montoya -- suppressed? I don't think that word means what you think it does. Now, they may indeed decide to continue the trial. I somehow doubt that they've designed a study where a single adverse indication means that they should forget the whole idea, and just pump hydroxychoroquine and bleach into everyone.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  18. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  19. TopTop #41
    M/M's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    for the central nervous system to be so symptomatic... is not a minor thing. Ethical science would stop until it was determined: how this happened, (and if woman in fact has transverse myelitis) can it be reversed or are her nerves damaged for life, et cetera. There are adverse reactions and there are adverse reactions.. a financially incentivized research often cannot wait for real answers, which makes science done this way dangerous. "First, do NO harm."

    Conflating hydroxychloroquine and bleach is a cheap trick podfish.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  20. Gratitude expressed by:

  21. TopTop #42
    podfish's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Conflating hydroxychloroquine and bleach is a cheap trick podfish.
    I do find it entertaining (?) how it seems that there'd be little overlap in the Venn diagrams of the attitudes of people regarding medical issues. For example, hydroxychloroquine seems to have many supporters who in general reject vaccines. I'm not sure I have any guess about the other beliefs that bleach-sniffers have about main-stream medicine!

    And of course most of the dialog that goes on is about the media portrayal anyway. It's full of hyperbole and oversimplification,and subject to radical about-faces. If indeed Hydroxycholoquine has beneficial effects overall, it's going to come out. It too hasn't been very actively suppressed - it's in the news pretty much every damn day, with plenty of vocal supporters.

    It won't be rejected just because John Oliver speaks derisively about it. People get way too excited about what 'influencers' are saying (great neologism; it describes Limbaugh, AOC and Trump as well as the instagram-kiddies) and forget that the world's a giant termite mound. The results we see in the end have emerged from the sometimes-invisible cumulative efforts of people from all over.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  22. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  23. TopTop #43
    M/M's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Excellent points...

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  24. Gratitude expressed by:

  25. TopTop #44
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Peter/podfish wrote:
    It too hasn't been very actively supressed - it's in the news pretty much every damn day, with plenty of vocal supporters.
    It has been "actively suppressed", Peter. -By the FDA, for instance. Try buying a bottle of the stuff over the counter at the back window of any Pharmacy. Try getting a prescription for even a small bottle of Hydroxychloroquine from your personal physician or any clinic.

    And Who or What is the FDA? - As I seem to have proved over on the other thread in my debate with "snoop4truth", the "Alphabet Agencies" created during the "New Deal" were all Delaware Corporations - i.e., Corporate-fascist entities.

    The gist of which was also confirmed by that problem child over at "Natural News":

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  26. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  27. TopTop #45
    Chauncey Gardner's Avatar
    Chauncey Gardner

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: View Post
    The conflated numbers for this years flu and the rebranding campaign were a brilliant success..
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  28. Gratitude expressed by:

  29. TopTop #46
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Yes, Fauci and Gates Do Have
    Ties to COVID-19 Vaccine Maker

    by Jeremy R. Hammond
    Sep 16, 2020

    A USA Today headline falsely claiming Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates have “no ties” to Moderna is illustrative of a major problem with our media.

    On September 11, USA Today published an article with a headline declaring, “Fact check: Fauci, Gates, Epstein and Soros have no ties to drug company Moderna”.

    But that headline was false.

    Both Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) and member of the White House coronavirus task force, and Bill Gates do have ties to Moderna, a pharmaceutical company developing a COVID-19 vaccine using mRNA technology.

    The article does rightly identify misinformation presented in a video widely shared on social media.

    With respect to Fauci, USA Today notes that the video’s claim that Fauci was the first CEO of Moderna is false. Nevertheless, Fauci does have ties to Moderna.

    Similarly, the article notes that the video’s claim that Fauci and Gates were college roommates is false. But Gates, too, nevertheless does have direct ties to Moderna.

    In fact, USA Today contradicts its own headline by acknowledging that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation “is listed as one of Moderna’s collaborators” on the company’s page at the investor website Flagship Pioneering.

    The closest connection USA Today acknowledges with Fauci is his having been “a co-reviewer of a vaccine platform Moderna is working to improve”, as indicated by a 2019 Shareholder Letter. This refers to a review of vaccine technologies Fauci coauthored that was published last year in the journal Nature Reviews Immunology.

    Although USA Today doesn’t mention it, the same letter, under the subheading “Partnerships”, mentions having $187 million in funding from grants, with a footnote reference. The footnote specifies that the grants are from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

    BARDA operates under the Department of Health and Human Services. DARPA is a research and development agency of the Department of Defense.

    That both Fauci and Gates have close ties to Moderna is no secret. Having encountered the headline in a news feed, I knew it was false and so did a quick Google search to document its falsity. It took about ten seconds to fact check USA Today’s “Fact Check”.

    My search immediately turned up a page published in March on the website of the NIAID, which operates under the National Institutes of Health (NIH), announcing the beginning of a phase one clinical trial for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine. The webpage notes that Fauci’s NIAID is “funding the trial.”

    Furthermore, Moderna’s candidate vaccine “was developed by NIAID scientists and their collaborators” at Moderna.

    The page quotes Fauci saying that the trial was “an important step” toward developing “a safe and effective vaccine to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2”.

    Similarly, I was able to immediately pull up a page from Moderna’s website listing the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as a “strategic collaborator”, with the foundation having “entered a global health project framework agreement” in January 2016 “to advance mRNA-based development projects for various infectious diseases.”
    The original USA Today headline falsely claimed that Anthony Fauci
    and Bill Gates have “no ties” to COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer Moderna.

    I emailed the author and the corrections editor on September 13 to request that they correct their false headline and acknowledge the NIAID’s partnership with Moderna, in accordance with USA Today’s code of ethics.

    I also pointed out that, even if they were unaware of that partnership, since the collaboration between the Gates Foundation and Moderna is acknowledged in the article, they knew that their headline was false. I also noted the hypocrisy of fact checking others while willfully misinforming the public themselves.

    Two days later, I received a reply from the author, Chelsey Cox, thanking me for my comments but sticking to the headline with the reasoning that “The headline reflects the analysis of the claim subject to fact-checking.”

    I replied, “It does not follow that since the claims about Fauci and Gates subject to fact-checking are false that therefore they have ‘no ties’ to Moderna. That is a non sequitur fallacy. Indeed, you point out yourself in the article that Gates does have ties to Moderna, his foundation being partnered with the company. The headline is false and should, by USA Today’s own ethical guidelines, be corrected.”

    She responded later that day to let me know that she’d gotten an editor’s approval to change the headline, which now reads, “Fact check: Moderna post makes false claims about Fauci, Gates, Soros, Epstein”. (That’s also not a great title since it makes it sounds as though Moderna itself was spreading the misinformation, but at least the false claim about Fauci and Gates having “no ties” to Moderna was removed.)

    USA Today did not publish an acknowledgement of the error and did not update the article to acknowledge that Fauci, like Gates, is partnered with Moderna in the development of its COVID-19 vaccine.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  30. TopTop #47
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: View Post
    Not only does Dr. Anthony Fauci have a conflict of interest in being a heavy investor in Big Pharma while at the same time a Federal Government employee, it turns out that Dr. Anthony Fauci is also the highest paid employee of the Federal Government. Yet to this day the so-called "liberals" love him. How can they be so blind? Whatever happened to the ethics of the Old Left?

    Fauci Is the Highest Paid Employee in
    the Entire 4-Million Federal Government

    Rakes in $420,000 a year in taxpayer money to tell you why your small business has to close

    Dr. Anthony Fauci made $417,608 in 2019, the latest year for which federal salaries are available. That made him not only the highest paid doctor in the federal government, but the highest paid out of all four million federal employees.

    In fact, Dr. Fauci even made more than the $400,000 salary of the President of the United States. All salary data was collected by via Freedom of Information Act requests.

    Only federal employees whose salaries were funded by taxpayers were included in the study. Therefore, Tennessee Valley Authority CEO Jeffrey Lyash— whose salary is paid by revenues of the corporation (owned by the federal government) — was not included.

    $2.5 million. That’s how much Dr. Fauci, Director of the National Institute for Health’s (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and current Chief Medical Advisor to the President, will make in salary from 2019 through 2024, if he stays in his post through the end of the current Administration, and doesn’t (or didn’t already) get a raise.

    In a ten-year period between 2010 and 2019, Fauci made $3.6 million in salary. Since 2014, Fauci’s pay increased from $335,000 to the current $417,608.

    In an August 13, 2020 Instagram interview with actor Matthew McConaughey, Dr. Fauci was asked (at point 16:49) if he had millions of dollars invested in the vaccines. Dr. Fauci laughed and answered, “Matthew, no, I got zero! I am a government worker. I have a government salary.” He didn’t mention his $417,608 salary was the largest in the entire federal government.

    Dr. Fauci became the early face of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, appearing daily, often in a live broadcast, to update the nation on the emerging COVID-19 disease. In March 2020, he convinced President Donald Trump on the 15-day lockdown policy to try and flatten the curve, and reportedly advocated on March 29, 2020, for extending the policy beyond its initial 15 days.

    Vice President Mike Pence, who chaired the Taskforce might have outranked Dr. Fauci in authority, but the VP’s $235,100 salary in 2019, was less than the well-paid NIH director with whom he shared the stage.

    Their Taskforce colleague Dr. Deborah Birx earned $305,972 in 2019, also less than Dr. Fauci’s salary.
    In comparison to Dr. Fauci: Speaker Nancy Pelosi will earn $223,500 this year. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts will make $270,700, and Members in the House of Representatives and Senators will make $174,000. Four-star military generals outrank, but still fall below Dr. Fauci at $268,000 a year.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scientist Dr. Stephen Lindstrom in charge of overseeing the CDC COVID-19 testing system, a system whose early roll-out failure set the U.S. testing system back several crucial weeks, made $108,747 in basic pay, an additional $23,533 in adjusted pay, and received an “award” of $750 in 2019.

    The 80-year-old Dr. Fauci holds a medical degree from Cornell University and began his 53-year career at NIH in 1968. He assumed his NIAID Director position in 1984 and has advised every president since President Ronald Reagan, though he serves directly under the NIH Director Francis Collins. Known as the nation’s top infectious disease expert, he qualifies for a full federal pension and social security under pre 1984 federal pension reform rules.

    The Executive Branch includes 2.1 million federal agency employees, 1.4 million members of the military, and 500,000 postal employees. Federal employee salaries are generally capped at level IV of the Executive Schedule, which was $172,500 in 2019.

    However, there are exceptions, as Dr. Fauci’s salary demonstrates. The exception exists to make federal salaries for doctors and scientists more competitive with the private-sector.

    In our data at, there are three doctors, all working for HHS, who out-earn the U.S. President with 2019 incomes ranging from $406,000 to $417,000.

    Critics and lifetime achievements

    On October 19, 2020, President Trump called Dr. Fauci “a disaster,” though his criticism appeared to be unrelated to the doctor’s salary.

    In 2008, President George W. Bush honored Dr. Anthony Fauci with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor.

    Dr. Fauci is the 32nd-most highly cited living researcher according to an analysis of Google Scholar citations. Polling has shown he’s the most trusted public figure in the U.S. for information on the pandemic and reliable information on Covid-19 vaccines.

    Source: Forbes

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  31. Gratitude expressed by:

  32. TopTop #48
    Barry's Avatar
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Worth every dime!

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: View Post
    Dr. Anthony Fauci made $417,608 in 2019

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  33. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  34. TopTop #49
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Barry: View Post

    Does Doctor Anthony Fauci also {& simultaneously} deserve "every dime" of profit he makes from his huge investments in the Pharmaceutical-Industrial-Complex, Barry?

    So I ask again, "Whatever happened to the ethics of the Old Left?" -For it seems to me that the present so-called & self-proclaimed "Liberal / Left" - who have been manipulated by the MSM into becoming fans of Fauci - are a pseudomorph. They are certainly not cut from the same cloth that I knew as a young child and teenager, growing up in Berkeley and North Oakland in the 'Fifties and 'Sixties.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  35. TopTop #50
    Zeno Swijtink's Avatar
    Zeno Swijtink

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: View Post

    Elizabeth Warren has questioned Fauci and concluded he does not hold direct financial investments in any of the companies developing COVID-19 vaccines.

    What's your evidence to the contrary?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  36. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  37. TopTop #51
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Apart from that being a dead link, Zeno [eliminate the i before the h in https ] Elizabeth Warren did not exactly pin Dr. Fauci to the Wall. She merely asked him one question - to which he answered "No." And then she took him at his word. Case closed. Well Zeno, may i inform you that - sometimes - people lie. -And her examination of the man is colloquially known as a "whitewash."

    Hot off the Presses:

    Covid-19 and the Global

    William Walter Kay BA JD

    Those lucky enough to have read Bertram Gross’s Friendly Fascism (1980) hot from the presses have long been equipped with a conceptual tool helpful in grasping a key component of modern society. The book explicates the “complex” as in: military-industrial-complex.

    Gross’s main insight:

    “…the military-industrial-complex does not walk alone.”


    The so called “military-industrial-complex” is no unique institutional form; the “complex” has become the standard mode of structuring the planning and control activities of corporate banking, agribusiness and mass communications.”

    Complexes are sprawling Big Government/Big Business alliances wherein cross-penetration blurs public-private lines. Complexes are broader, deeper and more flexible than cartels. They decentralise to the point of being leaderless:

    The web is spidery but there is no single spider.”

    Corporations and Ministries comingle with industry associations and university departments to form juggernauts that game regulations and drain treasuries.

    Gross’s exemplar is the auto-highway-construction-complex. America’s automobilization arose not merely as a function of consumer choice but proceeded on the basis of immense government investments in interstate highways and urban expressways. Gross also isolates a banking-housing-construction-complex. Others espy a prison-industrial-complex. I’ve written of a climate-industrial-complex.

    The medical-industrial-complex includes: pharmaceutical companies, hospital administrators, equipment manufacturers, nurses’ unions, medical schools, epidemiology agencies, and public health bureaucracies etc. These leviathans dominate every polity and transcend boundaries.

    Covid-19 is to the global medical-industrial-complex what the Iraq War was to the US military-industrial-complex.

    From liberal peaceniks to small-government conservatives, Americans knew the Iraq War was unnecessary. Iraq never had a serious weapons of mass production program; never harboured Islamic terrorists; never threatened the US. Nevertheless, the military-industrial-complex barrelled ahead. Result: trillions of dollars wasted; millions of lives destroyed.

    Similarly, across the political spectrum many know Sars-CoV-2 presents no greater health risk than a “nasty flu bug” the likes of which we’ve encountered countless times. Nevertheless, spearheaded by agencies like Fauci’s 2,000-employee National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Disease (NIAID) medical-industrial-complexes compelled governments to hype Sars-CoV-2 into the harbinger of the next Black Death. Result: trillions of dollars of unnecessary medical expense and sweeping economic disruption causing catastrophic levels of business failure, unemployment, substance abuse and suicide.

    The Iraq War was not a lose-lose situation. Arms manufacturers thrived. The war shunted billions toward high-tech research and development (R&D).

    Similarly, Covid-19 is a bonanza for many, especially Big Pharma.

    In true “complex” fashion, the US Government’s Operation Warp Speed allocated $10 billion to vaccine R&D. Pfizer received $2.5 billion for R&D and was further aided by National Institute of Health technology transfers and clinical trials. Pfizer’s partner, BioNtech, developed its mRNA vaccine with $440 million from the German Government. Pfizer received another $2 billion from Uncle Sam to retrofit factories.

    Moderna’s mRNA vaccine was developed by NIAID and the Biomedical Advanced R&D Authority. According to the New York Times:

    The mRNA vaccines in which we are now staking so much hope wouldn’t exist without public support through every step of the development.”

    (Oxford professors developed AstraZeneca’s Covid vaccine.)

    Moderna’s and Pfizer’s vaccines require patients to receive two shots. Mandated pricing agreements limit these companies to charging US customers no more than $19.50 per dose. Customers outside the US pay $25 to $37. At $19.50 Pfizer turns a 70% profit. One billion First World denizens will get vaccinated as will another billion in the developing world (at First World taxpayer expense). That’s two billion customers; two shots each. Do the math.

    Finally, no complex walks alone. Behind every complex’s mega-grift lurk politicians who daren’t let good crises go to waste. Ushering in our complex world order stride mandarins eager to nudge along state-building, democracy-winnowing processes.

    Gross, Bertram. Friendly Fascism; M. Evans and Co., New York, 1980.

    Opinion | The Covid-19 Vaccine Doesn’t Mean Big Pharma Is Your Savior – The New York Times (

    Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) FY 2020 Budget (

    About the author: William Walter Kay graduated from the University of Saskatchewan in 1985 with a BA Adv. (English) and a JD. After briefly practicing law William undertook an array of pursuits including non-profit and small business management, radio broadcasting and writing. He is the author of two books: ‘The Green Swastika – Environmentalism in the Third Reich’ and ‘From Malthus to Mifepristone – A Primer on the Population Control Movement’. William has maintained the website for 20 years. Scores of his articles have appeared on dozens of different websites. His forte is the sociology of scientific knowledge.

    [ Source ]

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  38. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  39. TopTop #52
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Last edited by Barry; 01-28-2021 at 11:01 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  40. Gratitude expressed by:

  41. TopTop #53
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    Anthony Fauci: 40 Years of Lies From AZT to Remdesivir

    As the planet’s “Virus Tsar” since 1984, he has spread misinformation and
    ignored critical questions. The consequences could hardly be more fatal.

    Torsten Engelbrecht & Konstantin Demeter

    Oct 27, 2020
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  42. Gratitude expressed by:

  43. TopTop #54
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  44. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  45. TopTop #55
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  46. Gratitude expressed by:

  47. TopTop #56
    Mayacaman's Avatar

    Re: Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine

    from the transcript of an interview :


    David Martin:

    And as you’ve seen over the now 140 patents and patent applications that Moderna has prosecuted, not once have they followed the law and identified the fact that they are in fact beholden to federal government grants for all of the things that they developed. They’re violating the Bayh-Dole Act, the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act, in every single one of their patent filings. This company has been operating as an illegal operation from the beginning. And it’s not surprising that their apologist-in-chief, their advocate- in-chief is none other than Tony Fauci, who’s every bit of an interest in seeing their vaccine jump to the front of the line, because NIAID has its vested interest in seeing it succeed.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Right, and Tony Fauci has put in 2.4 billion US taxpayer dollars into this venture.

    David Martin:

    At least, at least. Yeah. What we know, what we know is that he has put several appropriated and noncompeting grants, and most of your viewers don’t understand the difference between a competitive grant, which is a researcher who has to file a grant application. They’re up against all kinds of other grant applications that are competing for funds. Moderna has received noncompeting funds, meaning they don’t have to prove anything. They don’t have to do anything. They don’t even have to tell you, really, what the money is going to be used for. It’s like getting blank check authorizations, and we know that since 2005, roughly $1.7 billion a year, $1.7 billion a year has gone through the DARPA-funded bioweapon and biopreparedness program through NIAID. NIAID is the administerer of that $1.7 billion a year, and much of that has gone into a variety of programs that ultimately ended at Moderna.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Yeah. So let me give people kind of a little bit of a background on Tony Fauci. Tony Fauci came out of his internship. Since his internship ended at 1968, he’s never treated a patient. He’s a doctor, but he’s a doctor who doesn’t see patients. He went directly to NIAID. He then became the head of NIAID in 1984 at the very time that the HIV epidemic exploded. What Tony Fauci does, NIAID is supposed to look for the causes and also treatments for infectious diseases, for allergic diseases and autoimmune diseases.

    Tony Fauci does almost none of those things. What he’s done is he’s taken an enormous budget that began with the AIDS budget, which is now about $6 billion a year, plus another $1.7 billion a year that he gets from the Defense Department, which becomes part of his discretionary spending, and he invests that money in developing new drugs. He farms the money out to about 1,300 principal investigators who run their own little empires at Harvard, at NYU, at Berkeley, at MIT, and they begin the drug development forum. They do the clinical studies, and then when it gets to a certain point, he sells the drug or transfers it to one of the big pharmaceutical companies. But he does a deal with them where he splits the royalties for many of these drugs. [inaudible 00:14:19]. David mentioned the Bayh–Dole Act. The Bayh–Dole Act, I believe, was passed in ’84, but you may be right. It may have been passed a little earlier than that.

    David Martin:

    It was debated in 1979, signed into law in 1980.

    RFK, Jr.:

    All right. What that act did was, for the first time, it said it used to be that if the government developed a new technology or a new drug, it became part of the public domain, and anybody could use it, that there was no patent for it and you couldn’t patent it. The Bayh–Dole Act changed that, and it was a good intention. It was saying, “We’re going to give our universities and we’re going to give NIH the ability to patent things so that the money that the industry is making on them, on taxpayer-funded projects, some of that money can come back to NIH. Some of it can go to the universities, where there were brilliant scientists who could be working for private industry, but instead, they’re working in academic fields and they’re doing pure research. We want to reward them so they’re not walking around in tweed jackets with leather elbow pads and can’t afford anything. We’re going to actually give them a reward for their labor.”

    RFK, Jr.:

    The problem was, and you correct me if I’m wrong here, because I still don’t understand how this happened, that HHS interpreted the Bayh–Dole Act not only to allow the academic scientists to collect money and the academic institutions, like Harvard and MIT, which are making billions of dollars now on royalties on technologies that were created by their scientists. Also, HHS interpreted it to allow individual scientists within the agencies who use taxpayer money and worked for some period on these projects to also file a patent on the projects and then collect royalties.

    David Martin:


    RFK, Jr.:

    At that time, it was unlimited royalties. I think, actually, there was a scandal involving Tony Fauci with interleukin. He owned a patent for a drug called interleukin, and it came to Congress’s attention because an internal agent in his investigation found that a lot of the trial subjects in that study were getting very sick and they were dying and there was suicidal ideation and that Fauci had not told them of that risk when he was recruiting them.

    David Martin:


    RFK, Jr.:

    During the process of that investigation, it became clear that Fauci owned a patent for interleukin, and people were saying, “Wow, this guy isn’t telling people the risks of this. He’s going to make a lot of money on it.” At that time, he told Congress and he told the [inaudible 00:06:25], “Oh, don’t worry. I always planned to give that money to charity.” But he never told us how much. We have no idea to this day how much money he’s made on that or how many patents he owns.

    David Martin:


    RFK, Jr.:

    He could own patents. He could own thousands. Well, I think there are over 1,000 patents that he’s funded development of. We have no idea.

    David Martin:

    Close to 2,600 that they acknowledge. I think it’s 2,655 that they acknowledge, and they have another approximately 1,000 that we’ve tracked where the grants they’ve given have given rise to a patent, which is where, to your point, they would have march-in rights.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Let me [crosstalk 00:18:12].

    David Martin:

    So somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,500 patents.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Let me just finish painting this portrait of what Tony Fauci does. So this is a federal agency that is supposed to tell us why, where’s the autism coming from? This all happened under Tony Fauci’s watch. When he came in in ’84, the chronic disease rate in our country was 12.8%. By 2006, it had gone up to 54%. Those are autoimmune disease. Those are allergic disease. So that’s right in his wheelhouse. That is his expertise. He’s supposed to be an autoimmune expert. He does not spend a penny trying to figure out what environmental toxin exposure is causing this epidemic of disease.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Instead, he has transformed NIAID, his agency, into the primary incubator for the pharmaceutical industry for new products. So he creates the products. He sells it to them. He transfers it to them for very, very beneficial prices, and he walks it through the FDA approval process, which means then Medicare and Medicaid have to pay for that drug. He helps negotiate those deals and get beneficial deals with the drug companies, and then the money comes back to him and his staff through royalties.

    RFK, Jr.:

    So instead of researching and trying to stop all these chronic diseases from happening to our children, he’s ignoring all of that and simply essentially printing money. Let me tell you how important this is. In between 2009 and 2016, there were hundreds of drugs approved by FDA, and every single one of them came out of Tony Fauci’s shop. So that is the impact he has had on the pharmaceutical industry. During his tenure, the chronic disease rate has gone from 12% to 54%. We now use more drugs than any country in the world. We pay the highest prices for those drugs, and the drug industry is now controlling our government.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Tony Fauci, the reason he’s lasted there for 50 years is he’s like a mix between Bernie Madoff, which we can see in this Moderna racket, and J. Edgar Hoover. J. Edgar Hoover lasted for 50 years. He’s the only other guy who’s lasted for 50 years as an agency head, because he was using that agency to benefit big shots and make sure the Mafia didn’t get prosecuted, to make sure that dissidents, people he didn’t like would be spied on, like Martin Luther King and others, to bribe and blackmail big shots and files on everybody and to make friends in big places. Tony Fauci played the same game, and you’ve seen what he did. You know how this is a Ponzi scheme, this Moderna vaccine.

    David Martin:

    No question.

    RFK, Jr.:

    Nobody in the world would buy this vaccine if they knew what you and I know about it. It does not stop the disease. It has a huge injury rate, it does not stop transmissibility, and he has a $9 billion contract with the Pentagon for $500 million. How did he get that, by the way?

    David Martin:

    Well, but this is a thing, and this is where would that the generation that preceded you still be around, where you could actually pick up the phone and call an AG and say, there’s a crime. This is a crime and I think we need to stop dancing around the edge of it and call it what it is. Anthony Fauci’s behavior is racketeering. He controls the means of production. He allocates the market beneficiaries. To your point, he picks the winners and losers. That’s an illegal thing to do. That’s an antitrust thing to do. That’s a criminal conspiracy. He is actually picking winners and losers.

    David Martin:

    Then, just to add insult to injury, he’s doing the price fixing. Think about what happens when you negotiate a price where you in fact are a vested interest in that negotiation. There’s no public interest being served. This is a violation of his standard practice as a federal officer because he’s actually not acting in good faith. He is in fact price fixing.

    David Martin:

    You have the market allocation, a definition of antitrust. You have the interlocking directorate problem, which sounds sophisticated, but it isn’t. He runs the shop on the organizations that declare the problem. He mysteriously always has the solution in hand. I mean, people need to know that we’ve got COVID 2.0 on the books right now. Suddenly polio is back. Suddenly the threat of acute transverse myelitis is back. Suddenly the threat of a whole bunch of other things that allegedly his 50 years at the helm of infectious disease managed, these are all coming back.

    David Martin:

    If you could go back and you look at the patent record of his funded research, you realize he controls the pathogen, he then controls the means of detection, and the means of therapy, and then he controls the price that it’s going to get sold at, and he gets paid every step along the way.

    David Martin:

    This is Chicago mafia, 1920s. And the worst thing is we now have a situation where justice isn’t being served because, to your point, Bobby, the government controlled by pharmaceuticals has no incentive to actually address this problem. So we’re going to see a rush to approve an untested and unproven, and the reason, by the way, it’s untested and unproven is because every time they started down the pathway of a safety trial, it blew up.

    David Martin:

    Moderna’s technology was bad technology. That’s why in 10 years they didn’t produce a drug. It’s not because the technology was speculative. It was because the technology literally harmed the things that they put it in. And so the reason why we don’t have a drug from Moderna is for a good reason, they haven’t produced anything that’s safe. And now we’re going to whitewash that because we’ve got the guy who’s writing the check to support it, who’s now on the other side.


    [ CONTINUES... ]

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

Similar Threads

  1. White Paper on Hydroxychloroquine
    By Mayacaman in forum Coronavirus
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-06-2020, 09:05 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-05-2020, 09:41 AM
  3. The delusion called Fauci
    By Mayacaman in forum Coronavirus
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-28-2020, 10:17 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2020, 09:52 PM
  5. Double Double and Email Trouble
    By shellebelle in forum Help Desk & Feedback
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-29-2008, 04:21 PM