These are excerpts of November 2020 articles. For a quick sense of information and faster summary just read the red marked texted.
My primary source is the extremely well researched RFK jr.’s “Children Health Defense” organization. The CHD is suffering some severe censorship on social media because they are exposing government/corporate media inconsistencies, distortions and censored facts about the Covid pandemic!
2020-11-12 Flashback: How and Why the CIA Made Google As our governments push to increase their powers, INSURGE INTELLIGENCE can now reveal the vast extent to which the US intelligence community is implicated in nurturing the web platforms we know today, for the precise purpose of utilizing the technology as a mechanism to fight global ‘information war’ — a war to legitimize the power of the few over the rest of us. The lynchpin of this story is the corporation that in many ways defines the 21st century with its unobtrusive omnipresence: Google. https://www.technocracy.news/flashback-how-and-why-the-cia-made-google/
2020-11-06 Fauci Wants You Scared, Anxious, and Compliant– It’s Scientific! Seventy years of study have gone into how to scare people into compliance or submission in obeying public health officials and politicians. As it turns out, fear is a powerful motivator and can drive humans to be more easily manipulated into doing things they would ordinarily resist doing.
Few citizens realize that the government and public health scientists have put time, money and much effort into studying how to scare people into doing what the experts want us to do. The study of fear as a tool to manipulate individuals or populations is called “Fear Appeal.” It is a robust field of study within psychology and public health and has been widely used to intimidate us since the beginning of the pandemic. https://breggin.com/fauci-wants-you-scared-anxious-and-compliant-its-scientific/
2020-11-02 FDA Whitewashes Warnings About Coronavirus Vaccine Trials When the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) convened a panel of outside experts October 22 to advise it on potential coronavirus vaccines, members of the advisory committee expressed several serious concerns about the testing and approval process.
At the end of the daylong meeting, an FDA official summarized the discussion in a way that seemed to minimize, mischaracterize, or gloss over some of the outside experts’ warnings.
The acting chairman of the advisory committee—whose past relationships with companies developing coronavirus vaccines the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) documented in a recent report—endorsed the FDA official’s description. “I fully agree with your summary,” Dr. Arnold Monto said. The conclusion of the meeting left this reporter wondering: Did we just listen to the same discussion? Other observers have reacted similarly.
The public meeting, live-streamed on YouTube, came as the FDA was trying to restore public trust after appearing to bow to political pressure by issuing so-called emergency use authorizations for unproven coronavirus treatments.
The FDA has said it would consider granting an emergency use authorization for a vaccine if the human test subjects in a clinical trial of the vaccine have been followed for a median of at least two months after completing the dosing regimen. Two months is more than the White House wanted when it was hoping to get a vaccine authorized before Election Day. But members of the advisory committee expressed concern that two months of follow-up might not be enough to determine if the vaccine causes harmful side-effects or if whatever protection the vaccine provides wears off quickly.
Members also expressed concern that an emergency use authorization could undermine the ongoing clinical trial meant to gather critical data about the experimental vaccine over a longer period. In the vaccine trials, some test subjects are given the experimental vaccine and others are given a placebo—a harmless fake. To make the experiment as objective as possible, neither the test subjects nor the medical personnel interacting with them are supposed to be told who is in which group. In other words, they are supposed to be “blinded.” One vaccine developer, Pfizer, has stated that if it received an emergency use authorization, it would have an ethical obligation to tell test subjects about it and allow those receiving the placebo to switch to the vaccine. That could drain the clinical trial of placebo subjects and unblind all who remain involved in the study.
Some committee members said it is more important to determine if a vaccine spares people from the worst effects of the virus. One criticized key endpoints in company-sponsored trials as flawed because they reflect patients’ subjective impressions of symptoms rather than items that are objectively measurable. Another member called for greater focus on whether vaccines prevent people from getting infected in the first place, because preventing infection is essential to preventing the spread of infection. Even people who show no symptoms can infect others.
Committee members said they were wary of using coronavirus vaccines on children. They essentially argued that risks could outweigh benefits because COVID-19 is generally much less severe in children than in adults, and they called for strong evidence that a vaccine is safe before administering it to children. At least one expressed concern about inferring or extrapolating a vaccine’s effects on children from data on adults, as the FDA has contemplated.
Members urged the FDA to make sure minority populations such as Black Americans are well represented in clinical trials. Without sufficient racial minority representation in the clinical trials, “the net effect will be that perhaps the white population might be protected, and we will only see cases of severe COVID among the Black [population], which would be a total disaster,”.
Two problems. “First of all, trials really are biased—skewed towards mild disease,” he said. “Mild disease may not mean very much.” “The other problem with those efficacy measures is that most of them are really subjective,” he said. “And I think that’s a major concern. I mean, we’re relying basically upon reporting from the subjects without any objective validation of what they’re reporting.”
“I think children at this point should not be considered for use of this vaccine until there is sufficient evidence” that it’s safe for them, “and what we’ve been presented today does not provide that,” Notarangelo said.
“You said you cannot mandate what the drug companies might set as their primary endpoint. If I’m not mistaken, the taxpayers of the United States of America are paying the tab for this, so maybe you might have more authority to mandate than you might think,” Hildreth added.
FDA has set for coronavirus vaccine authorization—50% efficacy—doesn’t make sense in all situations. For health care workers and staff in long-term care facilities, a vaccine “that would take them merely from a mild infection to potentially an asymptomatic infection where they still might be infectious doesn’t seem like it’s something worthy” of an emergency use authorization.
Challenged the FDA’s stated openness to granting an emergency use authorization based on two months of observations. “There could be adverse effects we don’t know about, and so isn’t two months a little short?” https://www.pogo.org/analysis/2020/11/fda-whitewashes-warnings-about-coronavirus-vaccine-trials/
2020-11-00 Can Schools Really Reopen Safely? WHY OPEN SCHOOLS when everyone who believes in science knows it is unsafe? As soon as schools began to open in August, closings began — in some cases within days — due to spikes in coronavirus cases. When we examine why, we need to look at the big picture: capitalism and the prioritization of profits over people.
Schools should only reopen when reasonable safety could be assured. Teachers demand with adequate PPE such as masks and sanitizer but go way beyond. Free high-speed internet access and fully functioning devices for all students, school meals for take-home, a relevant and anti-racist curriculum are among the school-based demands. One of the major battlefronts has been the issue of building ventilation, as most schools have woefully inadequate air filtration. Another major battleground is class size, particularly in districts attempting hybrid models that have students divided into groups or pods attending at different times or on different days. While these plans may appear safer at first, teachers and school staff remain exposed to all the students, becoming potential conduits between groups of children.
All involved of course are conduits to their homes and to the community as a whole. In schools with full time remote-learning, battles between unions and school districts are taking place on issues of testing, teacher evaluation, and the number of hours that students, especially little ones, can reasonably be expected to spend in front of a screen. https://againstthecurrent.org/atc209/can-schools-really-reopen-safely/
.
Coronavirus Covid-19 Research History – Index
.
progressiveissuesblog 