Search This Blog

Tuesday, February 28, 2023

10 myths told by 'COVID experts' — now debunked

 In the past few weeks, a series of analyses published by highly respected researchers have exposed a truth about public health officials during COVID:

Much of the time, they were wrong.

To be clear, public health officials were not wrong for making recommendations based on what was known at the time. That’s understandable. You go with the data you have.
No, they were wrong because they refused to change their directives in the face of new evidence. When a study did not support their policies, they dismissed them and censored opposing opinions.

At the same time, the Center for Disease Control weaponized research itself but putting out their own flawed studies in their own non-peer reviewed medical journal, MMWR.

In the final analysis, public health officials actively propagated misinformation that ruined lives and forever damaged public trust in the medical profession. Here are 10 ways they misled Americans:

Misinformation #1: Natural Immunity offers little protection compared to Vaccinated Immunity

[What do you think of changing the title to this: Natural Immunity offers little protection compared to Vaccinated Immunity]

A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity. The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary COVID vaccine series.

vaccine
Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle.
AP/Nathan Papes

In fact, the scientific data was there all along — from 160 studies, despite the findings of these studies violating Facebook’s “misinformation” policy.

Since the Athenian plague of 430 B.C., it has been observed that those who recovered after infection were protected against severe disease if re-infected. That was also the observation of nearly every practicing physician during the first 18 months of the COVID pandemic.

Most Americans were fired for not having the COVID vaccine already had antibodies that effectively neutralized the virus, but they were antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Misinformation #2: Masks prevent COVID transmission

Cochran Reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of evidence in medicine. And one published last month by a highly-respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on COVID transmission.

When asked about this definitive review, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky downplayed it, arguing that it was flawed because it focused on randomized controlled studies.

A member of the New York Police Department (NYPD) receives a dose of the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine at Queens Police Academy in the Queens borough of New York, U.S., January 11, 2021.
It recently came out that masks didn’t have that much of an affect with preventing COVID-19 transmission.
Jeenah Moon/Pool via REUTERS

But that was the greatest strength of the review! Randomized studies are considered the gold standard of medical evidence.

If all the energy used by public health officials to mask toddlers could have channeled to reduce child obesity by encouraging outdoor activities, we would be better off.

Misinformation #3: School closures reduce COVID transmission

The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open, most without mask mandates. Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted Spain and Sweden.

Misinformation #4: Myocarditis from the vaccine is less common than from the infection

Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle. They cited poorly designed studies that under-captured complication rates. A flurry of well-designed studies said the opposite. We now know that myocarditis is six to 28-times more common after the COVID vaccine than after the infection among 16- to 24-year-old males. Tens of thousands of children likely got myocarditis, mostly subclinical, from a COVID vaccine they did not need because they were entirely healthy or because they already had COVID.

Misinformation #5: Young people benefit from a vaccine booster

Boosters reduced hospitalizations in older, high-risk Americans. But the evidence was never there that they lower COVID mortality in young healthy people. That’s probably why the CDC chose not to publish their data on hospitalization rates among boosted Americans under 50, when they published the same rates for those over 50.

Ultimately, White House pressure to recommend boosters for all was so intense, that the FDA’s two top vaccine experts left the agency in protest, writing scathing articles on how the data did not support boosters for young people.

A general view of a "face mask required" sign in the lobby of a salon in Hawthorne, NJ on February 16, 2022.
Biden’s idea of making sure everyone was vaccinated didn’t pan out.
Christopher Sadowski

Misinformation #6: Vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates

President Biden and other officials demanded unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, be fired. They demanded that soldiers be dishonorably discharged and nurses be laid off in the middle of a staffing crisis. The mandate was based on the theory that vaccination reduced transmission rates — a notion later proven to be false. But after the broad recognition that vaccination does not reduce transmission, the mandates persisted, and still do to this day. A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major U.S. cities had no impact on vaccination rates. They also had no impact on COVID transmission rates.

Misinformation #7: Covid originating from the Wuhan Lab is a conspiracy theory

Google admitted to suppressing searches of “lab leak” during the pandemic. Dr. Francis Collins, head of the NIH, claimed (and still does) he didn’t believe the virus came from a lab. Ultimately, overwhelming circumstantial evidence points to a lab leak origin — the same origin suggested to Dr. Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in a January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic. According to documents obtained by Bret Baier of Fox News, they told Drs. Fauci and Collins that the virus may have been manipulated and originated in the lab, but then suddenly changed their tune in public comments days after meeting with the NIH officials. The virologists were later awarded nearly $9 million from Fauci’s agency.

An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China's central Hubei province on April 17, 2020.
The theory that COVID-19 originated from a Chinese lab in Wuhan proved to be true.
HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via Getty Images

Misinformation #8: It was important to get the 2nd vaccine dose 3 or 4 weeks after the 1st dose

Data was clear in the Spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduces complications rates and increase immunity. Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the epidemic.

Misinformation #9: Data on the bivalent vaccine is “crystal clear”

Dr. Ashish Jha famously said this, despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice. To date, there has never been a randomized controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine. In my opinion, the data are crystal clear that young people should not get the bivalent vaccine. It would have also spared many children myocarditis]

Misinformation #10: One in five people get long COVID

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of COVID infections can result in long COVID. But a U.K. study found that only 3% of COVID patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity?

It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well. Calling these cases long COVID is the medicalization of ordinary life.

What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials, is that there has been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong. Public health officials said “you must” when the correct answer should have been “we’re not sure.”

Early on, in the absence of good data, public health officials chose a path of stern paternalism. Today, they are in denial of a mountain of strong studies showing that they were wrong.

At minimum, CDC should come clean and the FDA should add a warning label to COVID vaccines, clearly stating what is now known. A mea culpa by those who led us astray would be a first step to rebuilding trust.

Marty Makary MD, MPH is a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and author of “The Price We Pay.”

https://nypost.com/2023/02/27/10-myths-told-by-covid-experts-now-debunked/

Monday, February 27, 2023

Fauci emerges from home, mum after latest COVID lab leak report

 Former White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci emerged from his home Monday, one day after a bombshell report revealed that the Energy Department has concluded that COVID-19 likely leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China.

Fauci, who retired after more than five decades as a federal employee at the end of 2022, didn’t make any comments about the revised assessment, which reportedly was included in a recent intelligence report sent to the White House and top-ranking members of Congress.

The report reaffirmed what is a consensus in the intelligence community, that COVID-19 wasn’t the result of a Chinese biological weapons program, but most likely leaked out of a lab researching coronaviruses by accident. 

The DOE’s findings also match what Republicans on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee wrote last year in an interim report that doubted the so-called “natural zoonotic origin” theory.

The 82-year-old Fauci has repeatedly dismissed the so-called “lab leak” theory — insisting that evidence shows that the virus passed naturally from animals to humans.

Dr. Anthony Fauci outside of his home a day after a Department of Energy report concluded that COVID-19 likely leaked from a lab in China.
Dr. Anthony Fauci outside of his home a day after a Department of Energy report concluded that COVID-19 likely leaked from a lab in China.
Julia Nikhinson – CNP

At the onset of the pandemic, Fauci called the lab leak theory a “shiny object that will go away” in an internal email from April 2020. 

Two months earlier, Fauci reportedly took part in a conference call with other scientists in which they were warned that COVID-19 may have leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but it is unclear if he ever passed the warning along to other government officials. 

Republicans have argued that Fauci has rejected the theory to cover up his former agency’s involvement in funding so-called “gain-of-function” research, in which scientists make viruses more transmissible and harmful.

Fauci did not comment on the DOE report about the origins of COVID.
Fauci did not comment on the DOE report about the origins of COVID.
Julia Nikhinson – CNP

In October 2021, the National Institutes of Health admitted to funding gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab  — despite Fauci’s denials.

The NIH official blamed EcoHealth Alliance — a New York City-based nonprofit that has funneled US funds to the lab — for not being transparent about the work it was doing.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of Fauci’s most merciless critics, has repeatedly accused the former head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of lying to Congress about the origin of COVID-19.

On Sunday, Paul retweeted a reporter who wrote: “@RandPaul asked Fauci about a lab leak. He denied it. Repeatedly.”

“Classified documents leaked (they should be declassified!) showing scientists at DOE believe COVID leaked from Wuhan Lab,” Paul tweeted Monday.

1of6
Fauci previously dismissed the lab leak theory about COVID-19.
Fauci previously dismissed the lab leak theory about COVID-19.
Photo by JOHANNES EISELE/AFP via Getty Images
The Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan where some have theorized COVID-19 was originated.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan where some have theorized COVID-19 was originated.
AFP via Getty Images
Advertisement
Fauci has claimed COVID-19 most likely emerged from an animal.
Fauci has claimed COVID-19 most likely emerged from an animal.
Smithsonian's National Museum of American History via AP, File
Republicans have claimed Fauci only rejected the lab leak theory to cover up "gain-of-function" research funded by his department.
Republicans have claimed Fauci only rejected the lab leak theory to cover up “gain-of-function” research funded by his department.
UPI
Advertisement

The Biden administration defended Fauci Monday, with press secretary Karine-Jean-Pierre saying the attacks by Republicans “have been counterproductive, they have not been helpful.”

White House national security spokesman John Kirby added that President Biden has made “trying to find the origins of COVID a priority” and claimed that “there is not a consensus in the US government about how COVID started.”

In an interview with the Boston Globe on Monday, Fauci urged the public to “keep an open mind” on the origins of COVID-19 despite the revised assessment. 

“We must all keep an open mind to all possibilities” about the origins of the coronavirus, Fauci told the outlet, adding, “we may never know.”

“I don’t see any data for a lab leak,’ Fauci continued. “That doesn’t mean it couldn’t have happened.”

https://nypost.com/2023/02/27/dr-anthony-fauci-emerges-from-home-keeps-quiet-after-latest-covid-lab-leak-report/

Nerve-immune cell interactions in the lungs drive the development of allergic asthma

 Allergic asthma -- which is characterized by wheezing and breathing difficulties triggered by inhaled allergens such as pollen, mold, and pet dander -- is the most common chronic disease among children, and it can persist into adulthood. New research led by investigators at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), a founding member of Mass General Brigham (MGB), reveals how the relationship between nerves and immune cells in the lungs can contribute to the development of this condition.

For the study, which is published in the Journal of Allergy & Clinical Immunology, scientists generated unique newborn mouse models of allergen exposure that reproduce the progression of allergic asthma from childhood to adulthood. The worked involved tracking allergen-specific immune cells called T helper 2 resident memory cells (Th2-TRMs) that are known to be the central mediator of recurrent allergic inflammation in the lungs.

Experiments revealed that sympathetic nerves in the lungs produce dopamine and reside in proximity to certain T helper 2 cells following allergen exposure in newborns. When dopamine binds to DRD4 receptors on these T helper 2 cells, the cells are more prone to be transformed into Th2-TRMs and are instructed to produce immune response-stimulating molecules, or cytokines. Blocking this dopamine binding following allergen exposure in newborns reduced the T helper 2 cell transformation and alleviated lung inflammation upon the encounter of the same allergen during adulthood.

"Since human lungs are similarly innervated by dopaminergic nerves in early postnatal life, the dopamine-DRD4 axis may provide a therapeutic target to modify allergic asthma progression from childhood to adulthood," says senior author Xingbin Ai, PhD, an investigator at MGH and an associate professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. "Dopamine signaling is likely one of many age-related factors that regulate Th2-TRMs in the immature lung. Moving forward, it will be important to further delineate the molecular and functional features of the pathogenic Th2-TRMs generated in the immature lung. A better understanding of the mediators of the early life Th2-TRM program could identify new therapeutic targets for the treatment of allergic asthma."

Co-authors include Wei Wang, Carolyn Garcia, Fengzhi Shao, Jonathan A. Cohen, Yan Bai, and Alan Fine.

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health.

Journal Reference:

  1. Wei Wang, Carolyn Garcia, Fengzhi Shao, Jonathan A. Cohen, Yan Bai, Alan Fine, Xingbin Ai. Lung dopaminergic nerves facilitate the establishment of T helper 2 resident memory cells in early lifeJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2023; DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2023.02.011

Improving diagnosis of chronic lung, ear and sinus infections in young children

 University of Southampton researchers have recommended a method to help diagnose preschool age children with Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia (PCD).

PCD is a rare, inherited condition that leads to chronic lung, ear and sinus infections. Children with PCD have a problem with mucus build-up, which leads to inflammation in the airways and infections in the lungs, nose, sinuses and ears. Most people with PCD have symptoms from birth or early childhood. But some children with PCD may not be diagnosed until much later.

Currently, a commonly used diagnostic test for PCD is measuring the nitric oxide (nNO) in the nose using a chemiluminescent analyser. This involves holding a sampling tube at the nostril, whilst the patient either holds their breath, or breathes out through their mouth against a resistance. However, controlled breathing in these ways aren't possible for young children. Furthermore, chemiluminescence analysers are extremely expensive, not portable, and not available in most countries.

Jane Lucas, Professor of Paediatric Respiratory Medicine, led an international Task Force to review existing studies and literature to establish whether there were more effective and accessible methods of diagnosis for PCD in younger children.

The task force concluded that although holding the breath or breathing against a resistor whilst using a chemiluminescence analyser was more reliable in older children and adults, adequate measurements could be achieved by measuring nasal nitric oxide whilst a pre-school child breathes normally and should be the standard way when diagnosing PCD in children under the age of five.

The Task Force also suggested that although chemiluminescence analysers are more reliable, the relatively inexpensive electrochemical devices have a role in healthcare systems with limited resources. They also recognised that the portability of electrochemical devices may be useful in countries where patients live long distances from a specialist centre, enabling the specialist to travel to the patient.

The task force has published its findings in the European Respiratory Journal.

"We know that the earlier we can diagnose a condition, the better the chances are of implementing the best treatment plan for the patient," Professor Lucas said. "But current guidelines and technical standards focus on nNO measurements in older, cooperative children using technology that is not widely available.

"Pre-schoolers often need different methods to be employed when measuring nNO, methods that are less invasive and adaptable. Without guidelines for younger children, and electrochemical analysers there is huge variability in how people take the measurements and interpret them.

"This paper is the first step towards standardising sampling, analysis, and reporting of nNO measured as part of the diagnostic testing for PCD in all age groups including preschool-age children. We hope this will promote earlier diagnosis of PCD, and a standardised approach to interpreting and reporting results."

The task force also recommends that future research is needed to ensure the technical standard is kept up to date.

The findings have received support from charities and parents.

One parent said: "As a parent of a child with PCD, it is now clear to me why early diagnosis is so important. Diagnosis was only confirmed because I advocated for my son and insisted on further testing. My child had all of the classic symptoms of PCD but unfortunately, he had six operations for glue ear and the insertion of grommets (not recommended in PCD) before he was referred for PCD testing. Access to testing and an early diagnosis would have prevented these unsuccessful and unnecessary procedures, and earlier intervention may have prevented his bronchiectasis from developing at such a young age."

A spokesperson from Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia (PCD) Support UK said: "We support the recommendations outlined by the European Respiratory Society Task Force, as the use of nNO in preschool children will help to facilitate an earlier diagnosis for many with PCD. As PCD is a multi-system disorder requiring multi-disciplinary care, (including respiratory management, Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT), cardiology, dietetics, and fertility input), earlier diagnosis will ensure PCD patients get timely access to appropriate care. This is vital for preventing irreversible airway damage and poor quality of life."

Journal Reference:

  1. Nicole Beydon, Panayotis Kouis, June K. Marthin, Philipp Latzin, Murielle Colas, Stephanie D. Davis, Eric Haarman, Amanda Lea Harris, Claire Hogg, Emma Kilbride, Claudia E. Kuehni, Diana Marangu, Kim G. Nielsen, Catherine Pendergrast, Phil Robinson, Nisreen Rumman, Matthew Rutter, Woolf T. Walker, Thomas Ferkol, Jane S. Lucas. Nasal nitric oxide measurement in children for the diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia: European Respiratory Society technical standardEuropean Respiratory Journal, 2023; 2202031 DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02031-2022

CDC Spreads False Information About COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Monitoring

 by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A top U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) official gave false information about COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring to the agency’s vaccine advisory panel, and a spokesperson for the agency refused to correct the misinformation.

Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, director of the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office, presented on COVID-19 vaccine safety to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices on Feb. 24.

Shimabukuro went over updates to the safety signal for ischemic stroke following Pfizer bivalent booster vaccination that CDC officials detected in one of the agency’s monitoring systems.

After sharing the updates, Shimabukuro made the false statement.

No safety signals were detected for ischemic stroke for the primary series or monovalent boosters for Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines in U.S. and global monitoring,” Shimabukuro said.

That’s not true. The CDC identified ischemic stroke as a safety signal following Moderna and Pfizer vaccination after analyzing reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a different system, which the agency co-manages.

Asked for comment, Shimabukuro did not respond. But a CDC spokesperson doubled down on the false claim.

“The statement from Dr. Shimabukuro’s slides is correct. There have not been any safety signals detected at this time in the U.S. for ischemic stroke for the primary series or monovalent boosters,” Katherina Grusich, the spokesperson, told The Epoch Times in an email.

The CDC has previously offered misinformation and refused to correct it.

Barbara Loe Fisher, president and co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center, said what unfolded was concerning.

“Those of us who worked with Congress to secure vaccine safety informing, recording, and reporting provisions in the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act—of which VAERS was one—are deeply concerned that federal health officials are deliberately ignoring signals in VAERS and that mRNA COVID shots are causing ischemic strokes and other potentially fatal complications,” Fisher told The Epoch Times in an email.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines utilize messenger RNA, or mRNA, technology.

Bivalent boosters from both companies were authorized in the fall of 2022, but the primary series are still composed of the original vaccines, sometimes referred to as monovalent shots.

Shimabukuro’s statement had an impact. After his presentation, while the slide with the false information was on the screen, a member of the panel highlighted it.

I think it’s important to note [the statement] for the public,” Veronica McNally, president and CEO of the Fanny Strong Foundation, said, before reading it in full.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/cdc-spreads-false-information-about-covid-19-vaccine-safety-monitoring