Everett Chiropractic Center Blog

January 21, 2022

Ireland to End Most CCP Virus Restrictions, Including COVID Passport

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 4:43 pm

By Lily Zhou January 21, 2022 Updated: January 21, 2022biggersmallerPrint

Almost all CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus restrictions in Ireland will end on Saturday, including domestic COVID-19 Certificates, curfews, social distancing, and capacity limits.

Addressing the nation following the recommendation to lift the restrictions from the National Public Health Emergency Team, Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister) Micheál Martin declared it’s time for the Irish to “be ourselves again.”

This makes Ireland the second country following England to remove mandatory vaccine passports after they were implemented.

But the mask mandate, self-isolation rules, and protective measures in schools will remain, and Martin “strongly encourage[d]” people to get themselves and their children vaccinated.

After a Cabinet meeting on Friday afternoon, Martin said the Coalition government agreed to lift most of the restrictions the next day.

“Humans are social beings and we Irish are more social than most. As we look forward to this spring, we need to see each other again. We need to see each other smile. We need to sing again,” he said.

“As we navigate this new phase of COVID, it is time to be ourselves again.”

The Taoiseach said people’s trust in the government is a “precious and powerful,” yet “fragile” thing that requires “confidence that the government will do what is needed in an emergency,” as well as knowing “their government will not impose restrictions on their personal freedoms for any longer than is necessary.”

From 6 a.m. on Saturday, COVID certificates, which are currently required as proof of vaccination or recovery to access indoor hospitality venues, cinemas, theatres, gyms, and leisure centres, will be scrapped.

Premises will no longer have to manage people’s movements, group sizes, and distances, and the 8 p.m. curfew for hospitality businesses and indoor events will be lifted.

Restrictions on private indoor meetings (up to four families) and capacity limits for events and weddings will also be removed.

However, mask-wearing will still be required on public transport for those aged 9 and over, in schools for children in third class and above, and in most indoor public spaces for those aged 13 and over, unless food and drinks are being consumed.

The testing and isolation guidance for people with CCP virus symptoms, positive cases, and their contacts remain the same.

The mask mandate and testing and isolation guidance will be reviewed in mid-February, by which time Martin estimates children aged between 5 and 11 “will have had the opportunity to be fully vaccinated.”

In Ireland, all over-16s have been offered a booster dose of a CCP virus vaccine, and children aged between 5 and 15 have been offered one dose.

The rules on international travels also remain unchanged, with all arrivals required to show proof of vaccination, recovery, or negative PCR test results.

The Taoiseach went on to say that “a number of key supports particularly the employment wage subsidy scheme” will be extended to support the recovery of society.Lily ZhouFollowLily Zhou is a freelance writer mostly covering UK news for The Epoch Times.

“failings”

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 2:22 pm

Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Federal Workers Blocked Nationwide

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 2:18 pm

By Zachary Stieber January 21, 2022 Updated: January 21, 2022biggersmallerPrint

President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal employees was blocked on Friday by a federal judge.

Biden does not have the authority to impose such a mandate, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown wrote in a 20-page ruling obtained by The Epoch Times.

Federal law says the president “may prescribe regulations for the conduct of employees in the executive branch,” and government lawyers argued that the act of becoming vaccinated is “plainly ‘conduct.’” The judge, though, sided with plaintiffs, who asserted the conduct cited must be “workplace conduct” for him or her to regulate it.

“So, is submitting to a COVID-19 vaccine, particularly when required as a condition of one’s employment, workplace conduct? The answer to this question became a lot clearer after the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this month,” Brown said, referring to the Supreme Court’s recent finding that the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private businesses appeared to fall outside of its powers as conferred by Congress.

“The Supreme Court has expressly held that a COVID-19 vaccine mandate is not an employment regulation. And that means the President was without statutory authority to issue the federal worker mandate,” he added.

He said that without entering a preliminary injunction, or blocking the order for now, federal workers who have not gotten vaccinated or been approved for an exemption face suspension or termination or other negative consequences.

The lawsuit was brought by Feds for Medical Freedom, a grassroots coalition that includes federal workers, and other groups.

“Today’s decision by Judge Brown is a victory for the thousands of men and women who want to serve their government without sacrificing their individual rights,” Marcus Thornton, president of the group, told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

“The 6,000+ members of Feds for Medical Freedom want nothing more than to continue their service to this country without being subjected to unconstitutional mandates. For the time being, the court’s ruling grants them that wish, but the fight is far from over. We will continue to pursue every lawful avenue available to ensure our members’ rights are respected and their service is honored appropriately,” he added.

In a motion for an injunction, plaintiffs said Biden “acted beyond his lawful delegated authority” in issuing the mandate and another for federal contractors that has been ruled against by several courts.

In a motion opposing the request, defendants said the orders were designed to stem the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19 and fit “comfortably within the President’s broad authority to oversee the Executive Branch workforce.”

Shortly after Brown’s order was issued, the government appealed it to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

The appeals court could uphold the ruling, which would likely lead to a showdown at the Supreme Court, or lift the injunction while the case works its way through the courts.Zachary StieberREPORTERFollowZachary Stieber covers U.S. news and stories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is based in Maryland. 

New Emails Reveal Fauci’s Role in Shaping Highly Influential Paper That Established COVID ‘Natural Origin’ Narrative

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 11:30 am

By Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke  January 20, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022biggersmallerPrint

News Analysis

New evidence has emerged that suggests that Dr. Anthony Fauci not only initiated efforts to cover up evidence pointing to a lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 but actively shaped a highly influential academic paper that excluded the possibility of a lab leak.

Fauci’s involvement with the paper wasn’t acknowledged by the authors, as it should have been under prevailing academic standards. Neither was it acknowledged by Fauci himself, who denied having communicated with the authors when asked directly while testifying before Congress last week.

The article, Proximal Origin, was co-authored by five virologists, four of whom participated in a Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference that was hastily convenedby Fauci, who serves as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Jeremy Farrar, who heads the UK-based Wellcome Trust, after public reporting of a potential link between the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China and the COVID-19 outbreak.

The initial draft of Proximal Origin was completed on the same day the teleconference, which wasn’t made public, took place. Notably, at least three authors of the paper were privately telling Fauci’s teleconference group both during the call and in subsequent emails that they were 60 to 80 percent surethat COVID-19 had come out of a lab.

Until now, it wasn’t known what role, if any, Fauci played in shaping the contents of the article, which formed the primary basis for government officials and media organizations to claim the “natural origin” theory for the virus. While the contents of emails previously released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show the Proximal Origin paper clearly conflicts with the authors’ private views on the virus’ origin, it was unclear if the authors had preemptively reshaped their views to please Fauci or if Fauci himself had an active role in shaping the article.

As the head of NIAID, Fauci controls a large portion of the world’s research funds for virologists. At least three virologists involved in the drafting of Proximal Origin have seen substantial increases in funding from the agency since the paper was first published. Any interference by Fauci in the paper’s narrative would present a serious conflict of interest.

Emails Show That Fauci, Collins Exerted Influence

Newly released notes taken by House Republican staffers from emails that still remain largely redacted clearly point to Fauci having been actively engaged in shaping the article and its conclusion. The GOP lawmakers gained limited access to the emails after a months-long battle with Fauci’s parent body, the Department of Health and Human Services.

The new emails reveal that on Feb. 4, 2020, one of the article’s co-authors, virologist Edward Holmes, shared a draft of Proximal Origin with Farrar. Like Fauci, Farrar controls the disbursement of vast amounts of funding for virology research.

Holmes prefaced his email to Farrar with the note that the authors “did not mention other anomalies as this will make us look like loons.” It isn’t known what other anomalies Holmes was referring to, but his statement indicates that Proximal Origin may have omitted certain anomalies of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, suggesting that the paper may have been narrative-driven from the start.

Epoch Times Photo
Dr. Anthony Fauci (R), director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, speaks while U.S. President Donald Trump (C) and Vice President Mike Pence listen during a briefing on the coronavirus pandemic, in the press briefing room of the White House on March 24, 2020. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

During Fauci’s teleconference, participants had discussed at least two anomalies specific to the virus—the virus’s furin cleavage site, which has never been observed in naturally occurring SARS coronaviruses, and the pathogen’s unusual backbone, which fails to match any known virus backbone.

Farrar almost immediately shared Holmes’s draft with Fauci and Collins via email, while excluding other participants of the teleconference. The ensuing email thread containing discussion among the three suggests that the reason for the secretiveness may have been that they were shaping the content of the paper itself, something that has never been publicly acknowledged.

It’s notable that the email thread included only the three senior members of the teleconference. Using Farrar as a conduit to communicate with the authors may have been seen by Fauci and Collins as adding a layer of deniability.

Fauci, Collins Express Concern Over ‘Serial Passage’

During a Feb. 4, 2020, email exchange among the men, Collins pointed out that Proximal Origin argued against an engineered virus but that serial passage was “still an option” in the draft. Fauci appeared to share Collins’s concerns, noting in a one-line response: “?? Serial passage in ACE2-transgenic mice.”

Serial passage is a process whereby a virus is manipulated in a lab by repeatedly passing it through human-like tissue such as genetically modified mice, which mimic human lung tissue. This is notable given that during the Feb. 1 teleconference, at least three of Proximal Origin’s authors had advised Collins and Fauci that the virus may have been manipulated in a lab through serial passage or by genetic insertion of certain features.

Epoch Times Photo
Then-National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins stands in Bethesda, Md., on Jan. 26, 2021. Collins stepped down in December 2021. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

One day after Fauci and Collins shared their comments, on Feb. 5, 2020, Farrar emailed Fauci and Collins stating that “[t]he team will update the draft today and I will forward immediately—they will add further comments on the glycans.”

The reference to glycans is notable as they are carbohydrate-based polymers produced by humans. The push by Fauci, Collins, and Farrar to have the paper’s authors expand on the issue of glycans appears to confirm that they were exerting direct influence on the content of Proximal Origin.

According to Rossana Segreto, a microbiologist and member of the virus origins search group DRASTIC, emphasizing the presence of glycans in SARS-CoV-2 might suggest that Fauci and his group were looking to add arguments against serial passage in the lab. A study later found that Proximal Origin’s prediction on the presence of the O-linked glycans wasn’t valid.

The newly released emails don’t reveal what additional discussions may have taken place among Fauci, Collins, and Farrar in the ensuing days. Perhaps that’s partly because Farrar had noted on another email thread addressed to Fauci’s teleconference group that scientific discussions should be taken offline.

Online Version Appears to Incorporate Fauci, Collins Suggestions

Eleven days later, on Feb. 16, 2020, Proximal Origin was published online. The paper argued aggressively for a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2.

An immediate observation from an examination of the Feb. 16 version of Proximal Origin is that “glycans,” the term that Farrar, Fauci and Collins wanted to emphasize, is cited 12 times. We don’t know to what extent glycans were discussed in the Feb. 4 draft as it remains concealed by National Institute of Health (NIH) officials.

An item of particular significance is that the Feb. 16 version omits any mention of the ACE2-transgenic mice that Fauci had initially flagged in his Feb. 4 email to Collins and Farrar. While the Feb. 16 version of Proximal Origin acknowledges that a furin cleavage site could have been generated through serial passage using animals with ACE2 receptors, the cited animals in the Feb. 16 version were ferrets—not transgenic mice.

Epoch Times Photo
The P4 laboratory on the campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on May 13, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

The authors’ use of ferrets is peculiar not only because the term “transgenic mice” was almost certainly used in the Feb. 4 version but also because it was known at the time that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducting serial passage experiments on coronaviruses using ACE2 transgenic mice.

Even more conspicuously, the reference to ferrets was removed entirely from a March 17 updated version of the paper. In its place, a passage was added that stated “such work [serial passage experiments with ACE2 animals] has also not previously been described,” in academic literature—despite the fact that the Wuhan Institute’s work with ACE2 transgenic mice has been extensively described in academic papers.

Published Version of Proximal Origin Was Altered

Following the online publication of Proximal Origin on Feb. 16, 2020, the article was published in the prominent science journal Nature on March 17. In addition to the changes surrounding the transgenic mice, a number of other notable edits were made to strengthen the natural origin narrative.

On March 6, 2020, the paper’s lead author, Kristian Andersen, appeared to acknowledge the inputs from Collins, Farrar, and Fauci, when he emailed the three to say, “Thank you again for your advice and leadership as we have been working through the SARS-CoV-2 ‘origins’ paper.”

Perhaps most strikingly, the most often publicly cited passage from the March 17 version of the paper, “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible,” doesn’t appear in the Feb. 16 version. Additionally, while the Feb. 16 version states that “genomic evidence does not support the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory construct” the March 17 version was altered to state that “the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus.”

Similar changes in language are evident in various parts of the March 17 version. For example, a section that stated “analysis provides evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct” was amended to read “analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct.”

Epoch Times Photo
A medical staff member gestures inside an isolation ward at Red Cross Hospital in Wuhan in China’s Hubei Province on March 10, 2020. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

The March 17 version also omits an entire section from the Feb. 16 version that centered around an amino acid called phenylalanine. According to Segreto, a similarly situated amino acid in the original SARS virus had “mutated into phenylalanine as result of cell passage in human airway epithelium.” Segreto surmises that the Proximal Origin authors might have deleted this section so as not to highlight that the phenylalanine in SARS-CoV-2 might have resulted from serial passage in a lab.

Segreto’s analysis is backed up by the fact that another section in the Feb. 16 version which states that “experiments with [the original] SARS-CoV have shown that engineering such a site at the S1/S2 junction enhances cell–cell fusion,” was reworded in the March 17 version to leave out the word “engineering.” Indeed, while the Feb. 16 version merely downplayed the possibility of the virus having been engineered in a lab, in the March 17 version, the word “engineered” was expunged from the paper altogether.

Another sentence omitted from the March 17 version noted that “[i]nterestingly, 200 residents of Wuhan did not show coronavirus seroreactivity.” Had the sentence remained, it would have suggested that, unlike other regions in China, no SARS-related viruses were circulating in Wuhan in the years leading up to the pandemic. That makes natural spillover less likely. The director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli, herself admitted that she never expected a SARS-related virus to emerge in Wuhan. When viruses emerged naturally in the past, they emerged in southern China.

Shi’s credibility already was coming under fire for failing to disclose that she had the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2 in her possession for seven years—a point noted early on by Segreto. Additionally, the Wuhan Institute took its entire database of viral sequences offline on Sept. 12, 2019. Despite the Wuhan Institute’s documented deletion and concealment of data, Proximal Origin’s central argument is that SARS-CoV-2 had to be natural since its backbone didn’t match any known backbones.

However, even before the March 17 version was published, Segreto had stated publicly that Proximal Origin’s central backbone argument was inherently flawed, precisely because there was no way of knowing whether the Chinese lab had published the relevant viral sequences.

Fauci, Collins, Farrar Roles Improperly Concealed

The email exchange among Fauci, Farrar, and Collins presents clear evidence that the three men took an active role in shaping the narrative of Proximal Origin. Indeed, a careful comparison of the Feb. 16 and March 17 versions show that the changes made fail to reflect any fundamental change in scientific analysis.

Instead, the authors employed linguistic changes and wholesale deletions that appear to have been designed to reinforce the natural origin narrative.

Close scrutiny of the email discussions by the three scientists also suggests that there was no legal justification for redacting any of the newly released information in the first place.

Epoch Times Photo
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, talks to members of the press prior to an event at the State Dining Room of the White House on Jan. 21, 2021. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Science journals require that contributions to scientific papers need to be acknowledged. According to Nature’s publishing guidelines, “[c]ontributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.” The newly revealed sections of the still-redacted emails appear to confirm that Fauci, Farrar, and Collins met the criteria for acknowledgement but their names have never appeared on any published version of Proximal Origin, suggesting that the three didn’t want their involvement in the paper’s creation to be known.

Collins Asked Fauci ‘to Help Put Down’ Fox News Story

A final email released by the House Republicans shows that Collins wrote Fauci several months later on April 16, 2020, telling him that he had hoped that Proximal Origin would have “settled” the origin debate, but it apparently hadn’t since Bret Baier of Fox News was reporting that sources were confidentthe virus had come out of a lab.

Collins asked Fauci whether the NIH could do something “to help put down this very destructive conspiracy” that seemed to be “growing momentum.” Collins also suggested that he and Fauci ask the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to weigh in. As was revealed in previous emails released under FOIA, Fauci’s group had pushed NASEM in early Feb. 2020 to promote the natural origin narrative.

Fauci told Collins that the lab leak theory was a “shiny object” that would go away in time. However, the next day, Fauci took responsive action when he categorically dismissed the possibility of a lab origin of COVID-19 during on April 17, 2020, White House press conference. In doing so, Fauci cited the Proximal Origin paper as corroboration of his claims. Notably, Fauci feigned independence, telling reporters that he couldn’t recall the names of the authors. Unbeknownst to reporters and the public at the time, four out of the five authors had participated in Fauci’s Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference.

Now, we know that Fauci had involvement in shaping the very article that he cited.

Fauci’s intervention at the April 17 White House briefing was effective, since media interest in the lab leak theory quickly waned. It didn’t resurface until May 2021, when former New York Times science writer Nicholas Wade published an article discussing the likelihood of a lab leak. Wade noted that “[a] virologist keen to continue his career would be very attentive to Fauci’s and Farrar’s wishes.”

Notably, Segreto had raised a similar concern after Proximal Origin was first published in February 2020, asking whether certain virologists were scared that if the truth came out, their research activities would be curtailed.Jeff CarlsonFollowJeff Carlson co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He is a CFA-registered Charterholder and worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the high-yield bond market. He also runs the website TheMarketsWork.com and can be followed on Twitter @themarketswork.Hans MahnckeFollowHans Mahncke co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He holds LL.B., LL.M. and Ph.D. degrees in law. He is the author of numerous law books and his research has been published in a range of international journals. Hans can be followed on Twitter @hansmahncke.

Wife Stands Off With Hospital to Keep Her Husband Alive, and Wins

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 11:18 am

By Matt McGregor January 20, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022biggersmallerPrint

Sentiments expressed in random phone calls for Anne Quiner as her husband Scott lay in a hospital bed breathing through a ventilator ranged from “I hope your husband dies a vegetable” followed by a litter of profanity, to “he should have taken the vaccine; I hope he dies,” before hanging up.

While not the traditional Hallmark expressions for one to get well soon, Quiner said it was a feeling shared among some of the doctors at Mercy Hospital in Coon Rapids, Minnesota, where Scott had been hospitalized for COVID-19 complications in November.

In one recorded phone call with Dr. Linda Soucie in which Quiner was fighting to keep Scott on the ventilator, Soucie told Quiner, “Unfortunately, if we could turn back time and he had gotten the vaccine, then he wouldn’t be here,” just after Soucie had told Quiner, “After three years, I think we’ve gotten pretty good at determining who’s going to make it and who’s not, and unfortunately Scott’s in that range of the group that is not going to make it.”

In a recorded conference call, doctors told Quiner that they would be taking Scott off the ventilator on Jan. 13 because he would not recover due to what they said were his “destroyed lungs from COVID pneumonia,” and that their attempts at decreasing sedation only caused him pain.

Quiner told The Epoch Times that her petitions for alternative treatments, as well as to keep Scott on the ventilator, had been met with contempt.

With doctors determined to take Scott off the ventilator, Quiner sought legal counsel.

Making It Out Alive

Marjorie Holsten, Quiner’s attorney, told The Epoch Times that she filed a motion for a temporary restraining order that prevented the hospital from taking Scott off the ventilator.

Mercy Hospital then hired its own law firm that objected to the temporary restraining order on the basis that Holsten and Quiner’s position isn’t “supported by medical science.”

Because of this, the hospital requested that the court issue an order authorizing the hospital to take Scott off the ventilator.

The judge sided with Holsten, issuing the order based on the standard that irreparable harm would result if not issued, which Holsten said was easy to establish because if Scott had been taken off, he would have died.

On Jan. 15, Scott was transferred out of Mercy Hospital and taken to an undisclosed hospital in Texas, where Holsten said the doctors have reported Scott to be malnourished, having lost 30 pounds underweight, and dehydrated.

Both Holsten and Quiner said doctors in Texas were “horrified” by Scott’s condition when he arrived.

“One doctor said he didn’t know how Scott made it out of that hospital alive,” Quiner said. “He looked at his chart and said, ‘I can’t believe the heavy, sedating drugs they put him on.’”

The hospital was following a rigid late-treatment COVID protocol that has “very likely killed many people,” Holsten said.

Mercy Hospital is a part of the Allina Health hospital system.

When reached for comment on Scott’s treatment, a spokesperson for Allina Health told The Epoch Times that Allina Health “has great confidence in the exceptional care provided to our patients, which is administered according to evidence-based practices by our talented and compassionate medical teams. Due to patient privacy, we cannot comment on care provided to specific patients,” and that the hospital system wished “the patient and his family well.”

Currently, Holsten said Scott is “making tremendous progress.”

“Yesterday, Scott started following the doctor’s hands with his eyes, and now he’s blinking in response to questions,” Holsten said. “He was able to nod his head and move his legs for the nurse.”

The ordeal became a manifestation of Quiner’s biggest fear in taking Scott to the hospital after his symptoms worsened, Quiner said.

Since the beginning of COVID-19, rumors of neglectful treatment of COVID patients in hospitals fueled by financial incentives have circulated.

‘It’s a Bounty on People’s Lives’

Dr. Robert Malone, a virologist and immunologist who has contributed to mRNA vaccine technology, said in a December 2021 interview on The Joe Rogan Experience said that the financial incentives aren’t rumors.

“The numbers are quite large,” Malone told Rogan. “There’s something like a $3,000 basically death benefit to a hospital if it can be claimed to be COVID. There’s a financial incentive to call somebody COVID positive.”

The hospitals receive a bonus, Malone added, from the government if someone is hospitalized and able to be declared COVID positive.

“They also receive a bonus—I think the total is something like $30,000 in incentive—if somebody gets put on the vent,” Malone said. “Then they get a bonus, if somebody is declared dead with COVID.”

It was Stew Peters, a podcaster on The Stew Peters Show, that broke Quiner’s story and garnered audience support that facilitated Scott’s release.

After sending the two recordings Quiner made of her conversations with her doctors to her patient advocate and Minnesota State Rep. Shane Mekeland, they both then contacted Peters who Quiner said called her “right away.”

“He told me, ‘If you don’t get social media involved and get this viral, they will kill your husband and you won’t have any say in it at all,’”
Quiner said. “That’s when Stew got me on his show and within moments the hospital got like 300,000 phone calls. They had to shut their phone lines down.”

Quiner said it was Peters and his audience that were responsible “for helping me save my husband’s life.”

“Without their taking action, Scott would have died,” Quiner said.

At one point, there were so many phone calls that Quiner said the hospital began denying that Scott was a patient there.

“Our audience flooded the hospital and Frederickson & Byron Law Firm (the firm that represents Mercy Hospital) with calls, making them all
aware that the world was watching,” Peters told The Epoch Times.

The Stew Peters Show put a team together that included Attorney Thomas Renz and coordinated with a doctor to take Scott’s case and the hospital
where Scott was transferred.

On the Stew Peters Show, Dr. Lee Vliet, president and chief executive officer for the physician-founded Truth for Health, a nonprofit that has promoted early COVID treatment to keep people out of hospitals, said the CARES Act has documented hospital incentive payments.

“Hospital administrators know that they will be extra for doing the PCR tests and positive test results,” Vliet said. “A COVID diagnosis means admission to the hospital. On admission, there is an incentive payment. Use of remdesivir provides a 20 percent bonus payment from our government to the hospital on the entire hospital bill for that COVID patient.”

The use of remdesivir gives the hospital a 20 percent bonus payment from Medicare instead of other medicines, such as ivermectin, Vliet said.

“It’s a bounty on people’s lives, basically, to use remdesivir and prevent access to other medications such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin,” Vliet said.

She echoed Malone’s statement on hospital incentives for putting a patient on a ventilator and declaring a patient deceased from COVID.

In addition, she said the coroner gets a financial incentive for a COVID diagnosis.

She added that medical practices are paid more under Medicare and Medicaid services based on a higher percentage of their patients being vaccinated.

On average, she said, it has been calculated that hospitals receive a bonus of $100,000 minimum for every COVID patient who has the elements of COVID diagnosis with remdesivir and ventilator treatment before a COVID cause of death.

Vliet cites her research in an editorial in the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons titled, “Biden’s Bounty on Your Life: Hospitals’ Incentive Payments for COVID-19.”

‘She Just Wants to Keep Her Husband Alive’

Married 35 years with three children, Quiner and Scott have been through much together, she said, and in these last few months, Quiner has faced some of the hardest parts without him.

After 14 years, amid fighting to keep her husband alive, Quiner had to put their dog Toby down earlier in January because he could no longer walk.

“One morning I got up and he could not get up at all,” Quiner said.

Quiner has been verbally attacked not just through phone calls but through news and social media, platforms her children warned she avoid.

“My family told me not to even go on to Twitter because I didn’t want to read what they were writing about me,” Quiner said.

Still, Holsten said Quiner continues to fight.

“She’s a trooper, and she hasn’t sought any of this,” Holsten said. “She just wants to keep her husband alive.”

On his transfer to Texas, Quiner said she’s relieved.

“That’s the first thing I felt,” Quiner said, “relief that he’s out of that hospital and in safe care.”Matt McGregorREPORTERFollowMatt McGregor covers news from North and South Carolina for The Epoch Times. Send him your story ideas: matt.mcgregor@epochtimes.us 

Maxwell Defense Files Motion for New Trial Over Sex Trafficking Charges

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 10:32 am

By Dave Paone January 20, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022biggersmallerPrint

NEW YORK—Ghislaine Maxwell’s defense team filed a motion in federal court on Dec. 19 requesting a new trial for the British socialite.

On Dec. 29 Maxwell was found guilty of five out of six sex-trafficking charges on behalf of the late convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Accompanying exhibits for the new trial request are under seal.

At the center of the motion is Juror No. 50, who had recently stated publicly he was a victim of childhood sexual abuse and made this known to his fellow jurors during deliberations.

The prosecution had previously requested there be an inquiry into the juror and the defense had previously requested a new trial.

On Jan. 5, Judge Alison Nathan set a briefing schedule with Jan. 19 as the date the defense could officially file a motion for a new trial. The prosecution could respond on Feb. 2 and the defense could reply to that on Feb. 9.

The prosecution informed Nathan on Jan. 10 that if there’s no new trial it will drop its two outstanding perjury charges against Maxwell.

Juror No. 50 is represented by Todd Spodek, of Spodek Law Group in Manhattan.

Spodek submitted a motion to intervene, making Juror No. 50 an active party in the case, and requested to be provided with Juror No. 50’s questionnaire.

It’s believed that there was a question for potential jurors regarding any past history of sexual abuse, and if a potential juror had experienced any, would it have an influence on his or her verdict.

Juror No. 50 has publicly stated he went through the questionnaire very quickly and doesn’t recall what he wrote.

Regarding the two perjury charges, the prosecution requested that Nathan “exclude time” under the Speedy Trial Act, from Jan. 19 through April 1, essentially providing more time for both parties to research and brief post-trial motions.

The Speedy Trial Act has a maximum number of days designated for specific elements of a case to be completed. Excluding time is stopping the clock for a predetermined period.

On Jan. 14 Nathan scheduled Maxwell’s sentencing for June 28.Dave PaoneFollowDave Paone covers New York City.

Little children banned from elementary school event in Connecticut, discriminated against over “health status”

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 10:29 am

Posted by: Jim Patrick| |CategoriesCaught on CameraEditorialFeaturedShare: 

The following contains editorial content which is the opinion of the writer, a retired Police Chief and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today. 

ANSONIA, CT- In this edition of COVID stupidity, we bring you the city of Ansonia, Connecticut.

Children, who have better odds of getting struck by lightning twice in the same day and seeing Elvis at the same time, than getting seriously ill from the Wuhan virus, must be vaccinated in order to attend a Harlem Wizards basketball exhibition next month.

According to Fox 61 in Hartford, elementary school students from the town of Ansonia or Derby have been invited to attend the basketball exhibition at the Ansonia Armory on February 3.

However, unvaccinated children have been banned from the event. And some are speaking out about it.

https://www.fox61.com/embeds/video/520-45dff1fe-56e9-4886-b80a-937fae7744f2/iframe

Some parents feel that unvaccinated kids are being singled out for discrimination, with one mother saying, “I think it’s a tough one.”

In fact, Ansonia’s mayor, David Cassetti, a Democrat said, “I understand there is some pushback, and I would not mandate it to people that you have to be vaccinated. That’s a personal preference.”

Of course this isn’t being done for health reasons but for political ones. Just like some politicians attempted to bribe people to get vaccinated by French fries, booze, and cash, in this case it’s being done as a bludgeon to force parents to vaccinate their kids.

Fox 61 noted that only 15 percent of Ansonia’s elementary school students are fully vaccinated as of last week, according to Griffin Heath, who runs vaccination clinics throughout the street and said it was an opportunity to “incentivize” people in order to increase those numbers.

“People who are not vaccinated are running the risk of contracting the virus and also perhaps getting it to change,” said one woman, Donna Lindgren of Ansonia, who clearly hasn’t been following the news.

The current variant of COVID, omicron, has infected both vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Perhaps she’s been watching a bit too much of Don Lemon on CNN, or the late night idiots—Colbert, Kimmel, and Fallon.

However forcing elementary school children to be vaccinated to attend a community event, in essence discriminating against them or putting a virtual “scarlet letter” on them is unfair to children and sends the wrong message.

Especially given the fact that as of January 19, 2022, 596 children between the ages of 5-18 have died from COVID, according to the CDC. In two years. Some of those children had additional comorbidities such as cancer, reports say. So for less than 600 fatalities of children in two years, you’re going to ban them from going to a basketball exhibition? Unbelievable.

“I know what some people are saying. It’s like, you know, why should it be the limiting factor, but it’s I guess it’s like the carrot at the end of the stick,” said Joseph DiBacco, Ansonia’s Superintendent of Schools.

See…politics, not public health.

DiBacco also said that schools in Ansonia issue flyers about community events, and let families decide what they participate in…unless their kids are not vaccinated.

“It’s not just about you,” said someone named Sidra Syed of Ansonia, another CNN/MSNBC mind-numbed robot. “I understand you don’t want to get vaccinated, but if you get the virus, you could give it to someone else.”

Or, if you are vaccinated, you could get the virus and give it to someone else. This is literally Twilight Zone material.

Fox 61 said they reached out to Griffin Health to find out why they were discriminating against unvaccinated children, however despite multiple requests from the outlet gave no response.

ESD District #2 Proposition No. 1

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 10:21 am

When others say it so much better than I would…

“Everett voters should never approve another levy. Ever. After years of complaining – and winning in court – that dependence on levies is unconstitutional, the Everett School District has done everything it can to ensure its dependence on levies will continue forever. There are two common myths that need to be addressed.

The myth of underpaid teachers. For ESD teachers, for 2019-2020, the median total compensation was $150,000 and the highest around $200,000. And, they want this increased again, in 2 years, to 15% or more paid for by you from this levy.

Th myth of underpaid administrators. For ESD administrators, for 2019-2020, the median total compensation was $200,000 and the highest was $375,000. Total compensation includes salary, insurance benefits, payroll taxes, and pension funding, all paid for by taxpayers.

Dollars from this key levy would be dumped into the General Fund where 85% goes to compensations for all district employees, not just nurses. This levy amount is about what is legally allowed. The ESD is counting on Olympia to raise the levy lid later. The ESD needs reining in. ESD’s taxpayer cost charts showing a flat rate are laughable. A flat rate multiplied by skyrocketing assessed property values equals skyrocketing property taxes. For an honest cost analysis http://www.nolevy.com. ESD’s salaries are already generous. To demand yet another increase, on the backs of hardworking Everett area citizens is wrong. Vote no this levy.”

That statement is in the Voter’s pamphlet, and was prepared by: Jeff Heckathorn, Jeannie Magdua, and Janelle Burke

January 20, 2022

FBI Raids Home, Campaign Office of Rep. Henry Cuellar

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 2:00 pm

By Zachary Stieber January 20, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022biggersmallerPrint

FBI agents were seen at the home and campaign office of Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), a frequent critic of President Joe Biden, on Wednesday.

Photographs shared by local reporters showed agents at the residence in Laredo removing bags, bins, and at least one computer.

Federal agents also went to Cuellar’s campaign office.

In a statement to news outlets, the FBI said the bureau “was present in Laredo conducting court-authorized law enforcement activity,” adding that “The FBI cannot provide further comment on an ongoing investigation.”

“Congressman Cuellar will fully cooperate in any investigation. He is committed to ensuring that justice and the law are upheld,” a Cuellar spokesperson told media.

Cuellar, 66, has represented Texas’s 28th Congressional District since 2005.

The district includes land that touches the U.S.-Mexico border.

Cuellar, considered a moderate, has been a frequent critic of Biden’s lax immigration enforcement policies, which experts say have contributed to the explosion in illegal immigration recorded since Biden took office one year ago.

Under the Democrat, the most illegal immigrant apprehensions at the southwest border were recorded for both a fiscal year and a calendar year.

Biden shortly after being sworn in halted construction of the border wall, curbed use of pandemic-era expulsion powers, and directed officials to end the “Remain in Mexico” program, which forced many asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their claims to be heard.

Some of the administration’s moves have been blocked or reversed by courts, but December arrests were higher than the month before, according to preliminary figures provided in court documents by the Customs and Border Protection agency.

Jessica Cisneros, a lawyer, and educator Tannya Benavides are challenging Cuellar in the Democratic primary for the seat he holds.

Cueller beat Cisneros in the last primary by about 2,700 votes.

Cisneros has targeted Cuellar’s reputation and voting record, calling him “Trump’s favorite Democrat” and criticizing his willingness to work with Republicans on legislation.

Benavides offered a similar critique, saying the district should be represented by a more progressive Democrat.Zachary StieberREPORTERFollowZachary Stieber covers U.S. news and stories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is based in Maryland. 

School District Near Philadelphia Apologizes for Teacher Taping Mask to Student’s Face

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 1:49 pm

By Bill Pan January 20, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022biggersmallerPrint

Philadelphia-area public school district has apologized after a photo of a teacher taping a mask to a student’s face went viral on social media.

The image in question was first posted on Monday in Facebook group “North Penn Stronger Together.” It appears to show a teacher applying tape to a mask on the face of a student, who was seated in a classroom.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FNPstrongertogether%2Fposts%2F246620364320900&show_text=true&width=500

The post alleged the photo shows “a Pennfield Middle School co-teacher taping a mask to a child’s face” and demanded explanation from the North Penn School District, as well as from the Democrats who were re-elected to the district’s school board in November 2021.

“Pro-mask or anti-mask, I hope we can all agree that taping masks to children’s faces crosses the LINE. This was not a joke for the child or the parents,” said North Penn Stronger Together, which was founded in support of Republicans seeking to unseat the Democratic school board members last fall.

In a statement released Wednesday, the school district said it was an isolated incident and did not involve malicious intent.

“An image taken in one of our classrooms last week and circulating on social media does not represent the universal values that the North Penn School District strives to instill in both our students and staff,” the district said. “After an immediate investigation, it was determined that while the incident was isolated and no malice was intended, the actions of the teacher were entirely inappropriate and unacceptable, no matter the context.”

The teacher and the student have not been identified, neither is it known when the photo was taken. The school district said “all personnel and student matters are confidential” and that it could provide “no further information.”

The photo has also triggered a social media skirmish between North Penn Strong Together and its Democratic counterpart “North Penn Neighbors for Progress,” with the Democrats accusing the Republicans of engaging in “exploitation of a child and family on social media” for political gain.

“The continued exploitation of any piece of negative news to re-instigate the cynical, partisan rhetoric that fueled your failed campaign is exhausting,” said Neighbors for Progress. “Please stop demanding public comment on a matter that must be foremost dealt with internally.”

In response, Stronger Together said the group is “no longer tied with any political race” and that they were “told about and given permission to post the picture.”

“The parents and the child were not okay with that action, and were not happy with the administrations’ handling of the incident,” the group said. “While we respect the the privacy of personnel issues, we are PARENTS NOT POLITICIANS seeking some kind of leadership that gives us confidence that that faceless child won’t be one of ours.”

In a similar incident last year, a substitute teacher in Las Vegas allegedly taped a mask to the face of a 9-year-old student because the child forgot to wear one when he got up during class for a drink of water. The student’s mother told media that the teacher, instead of simply telling her son to put a mask on, brought the boy to the front of the classroom and taped his mask across his face.Bill PanREPORTERFollow

My Teacher. Tai chi ‘Kung’

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 1:10 pm

Researcher Calls Out Censorship After Journal Pulls COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Events Analysis

Filed under: Uncategorized — doctordilday @ 1:02 pm

By Petr Svab January 19, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022biggersmallerPrint

Jessica Rose didn’t ask for any of this. She started to analyze data on adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccines simply as an exercise to master a new piece of software. But she couldn’t ignore what she saw and decided to publish the results of her analysis. The next thing she knew, she was in a “bizzarro world,” she told The Epoch Times.

A paper she co-authored based on her analysis was withdrawn by Elsevier, the company publishing the academic journal that ran the article, under circumstances that raised eyebrows among her colleagues. The publisher declined to comment on the matter.

Rose received her PhD in computational biology from the Bar-Ilan University in Israel. After finishing her post-doctoral studies on molecular dynamics of certain proteins, she was looking for a new challenge. Switching to a new statistical computing software, she was looking for an interesting data set to sharpen her skills on. She picked the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a database of reports of health problems that have occurred after a vaccination and may or may not have been caused by it.

CCP virus vaccine scotland uk
A nurse administers a CCP virus vaccine to a health and care staff member at the NHS Louisa Jordan Hospital in Glasgow, Scotland, on Jan. 23, 2021. (Jane Barlow/PA)

She said she wasn’t looking for anything in particular in the data.

“I don’t go in with questions,” she said.

What she found, however, was disturbing to her.

VAERS has been in place since 1990 to provide an early warning signal that there might be a problem with a vaccine. Anybody can submit the reports, which are then checked for duplicates. They are largely filed by health care personnel, based on previous research. Usually, there would be around 40,000 reports a year, including several hundred deaths.

But with the introduction of the COVID-19 vaccines, VAERS reports went through the roof. By Jan. 7, there were over a million reports, including more than 21,000 deaths. Other notable issues include over 11,000 heart attacks, nearly 13,000 cases of Bell’s palsy, and over 25,000 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis.

Rose found the data alarming, only to realize authorities and even some experts were generally dismissing it.

“Clearly, there’s no concern [among these authorities and experts] for people who are suffering adverse events,” she said.

The usual arguments against the VAERS data have been that it’s unverified and unreliable.

Rose, however, sees such arguments as irrelevant—VAERS was never meant to provide definitive answers, it’s meant to give early warning and, as she sees it, it’s doing just that.

“It’s emitting so many safety signals and they’re being ignored,” she said.

Epoch Times Photo
A screenshot of the homepage of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is co-sponsored by the CDC, FDA, and HHS. (Screenshot/The Epoch Times)

She teamed up with Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist, and epidemiologist, to write a paper on VAERS reports of myocarditis in youth—an issue already acknowledged as a side effect of the vaccination, though usually described as rare.

As of July 9, they found 559 VAERS reports of myocarditis, 97 among children ages 12–15. Some of them may have been related to COVID itself, which can also cause heart problems, but there were too many cases to dismiss the likelihood the vaccines were involved, according to the authors.

“Within 8 weeks of the public offering of COVID-19 products to the 12–15-year-old age group, we found 19 times the expected number of myocarditis cases in the vaccination volunteers over background myocarditis rates for this age group,” the paper said.

After two weeks, on Oct. 15, the paper disappeared from the publisher’s website, replaced by a notice of “Temporary Removal.” Not only weren’t the authors told why, they weren’t informed at all, according to Rose.

“It’s unprecedented in the eyes of all of my colleagues,” she said.

When they brought up the issue with the publisher, they were first told the paper was pulled because it wasn’t “invited,” Rose said. That was shot down as irrelevant by McCullough, who threatened to sue for breach of contract. The publisher then turned to its terms of use, saying it has the right to refuse any paper for any reason.

Epoch Times Photo
Jessica Rose. (Courtesy of Jessica Rose)

It’s still not clear why the paper was pulled.

“I do apologise, but Elsevier cannot comment on this enquiry,” said Jonathan Davis, the publisher’s communications officer, in an email to The Epoch Times.

In late November, the paper was replaced by a noticethat the “article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor.”

“It just feels like weird censorship that isn’t really justified,” Rose said.

The paper’s conclusions are not necessarily controversial. A recent Danish studyconcluded, for example, an elevated risk of myocarditis for young people following the Moderna COVID vaccine.

It’s common, however, even for papers that examine potential issues with the vaccines to frame their results in a way that still endorses vaccination.

“That’s what you have to say to get your work published these days,” Rose said.

Her paper did no such thing.

“As part of any risk/benefit analysis which must be completed in the context of experimental products, the points herein must be considered before a decision can be made pertaining to agreeing to 2-dose injections of these experimental COVID-19 products, especially into children and by no means, should parental consent be waived under any circumstances to avoid children volunteering for injections with products that do not have proven safety or efficacy,” the paper said.

The paper also called the vaccines “injectable biological products”—a reference to the fact that they are distinct from all other traditional vaccines.

A traditional vaccine uses “whole live or attenuated pathogens” while the COVID vaccines use “mRNA in lipid nanoparticles,” Rose explained via email. She said the lipid nanoparticles include “cationic lipids which are highly toxic.” Pfizer, the manufacturer of the most popular COVID-19 vaccine in many countries, addressed the issue by saying the dose is sufficiently low to ensure “an acceptable safety margin,” according to the European drug authority, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (pdf).

Rose also noted that the COVID-19 vaccines haven’t gone “through the 10-15 years of safety testing that vaccines have always had to go through … for obvious reasons.”

By this point, Rose is no longer a dispassionate observer. Reading through countless VAERS reports gave her a window into the hardships of those who believe they’ve been harmed by the vaccines.

“I speak for all of those people,” she said.

Epoch Times Photo
An internal medicine resident sits in a waiting area before receiving a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at a hospital in Aurora, Colorado, on Dec. 16, 2020. (Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images)

In the past, 50 reports of deaths in VAERS would prompt authorities to hit the brakes and investigate, Rose said. In her view, that should have happened with the COVID-19 vaccines a year ago.

Not only has that not happened, but it isn’t even clear what would be enough to convince the authorities to do so.

“What’s the cut-off number for the number of deaths?” Rose asked.

The counterargument is that the vaccines save more lives than they cost. But in Rose’s view, this logic is flawed since the vaccines haven’t been around long enough and studied thoroughly enough to tell how many lives they may cost.

It is known, however, that VAERS understates adverse events following vaccination—by a factor of anywhere between 5 and as much as 100, based on some estimates.

Submitting a VAERS report takes about 30 minutes and many medical practitioners simply don’t have the time, Rose said. Some may feel that filing the report may get them labeled as “anti-vaxxers.” Some may simply not associate whatever health issue they’re facing with the vaccination. Some may not even be aware VAERS exists.

It’s unlikely that any significant number of the reports would be fraudulent, she suggested, noting it’s a federal offense to submit a false report.

Rose has now joined the ranks of dissident doctors and researchers skeptical of the official line on the vaccines and the pandemic in general. She described it as something she’s compelled to do despite the disincentives involved.

“We don’t want to be doing this. But it is our duty. Doctors swore an oath to do no harm. And researchers with integrity cannot look away from this,” she said via email.

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly identified Elsevier as an academic journal. Elsevier is a company specializing in publishing scientific literature. The Epoch Times regrets the error.Petr SvabREPORTERFollowPetr Svab is a reporter covering New York. Previously, he covered national topics including politics, economy, education, and law enforcement.

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: