Posted originally on the conservative tree house September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 526 Comments

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory group who evaluate the efficacy and safety of vaccines have rejected the request for Pfizer booster shots.  However, the White House – desperately trying to push as many needle jabs as possible – was already on track to begin giving booster shots this month.  The implication here is that the White House was not following the recommendations of the FDA or the science.

WASHINGTON DC – A U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel voted Friday against approval of Pfizer (PFE)/BioNTech’s (BNTX) third dose for the U.S.

The vote comes after a heated debate in recent weeks over the need for booster or additional shots, which both mRNA companies — Pfizer and Moderna (MRNA) — have advocated for.

Dr. Peter Marks, the FDA’s leading expert on vaccines, touched on the controversy in his introductory remarks. “We know that there may be differing opinions of the interpretation of the data regarding the potential need for additional doses, and we strongly encourage all the different viewpoints to be voiced and discussed regarding the data, which is complex, and evolving,” Marks said.

He added the meeting focused on almost real-time analyses compared to what is happening in the world, and the goal remains slowing the spread of COVID-19, which is killing almost 2,000 Americans daily.

The question the advisory panel was given to consider only used the U.S. data, a small dataset, despite the presentations including data from the U.K. and Israel.

Marks instructed the panel to consider all the data, noting, “This is not a legal proceeding, this is a science proceeding, so you can take all the data into account.”

The meeting precedes a September 20 start date for additional doses, announced last month by the White House COVID-19 Response Team, despite U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data showing some Americans are already receiving third doses. Last month, the CDC recommended additional doses for immunocompromised people.

A CDC advisory panel will meet next week to discuss recommendations for who should receive a booster dose. (read more)

This happens on the same day the CDC announces a study [Data Here] showing the Moderna vaccine remained stronger in protecting against hospitalization compared to Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ).

Among U.S. adults without immunocompromising conditions, vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization during March 11–August 15, 2021, was higher for the Moderna vaccine (93%) than the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (88%) and the Janssen vaccine (71%).  (link)

However, Moderna has now highlighted their own diminished benefit study [DATA HERE] showing the vaccine effectiveness wanes after 8 months:

[…] “In the analysis, 88 breakthrough cases of COVID-19 occurred in the more recently vaccinated group (49.0 cases per 1000 person-years) compared to 162 cases in the group vaccinated last year (77.1 cases per 1000 person-years). The reduction in incidence rates for participants vaccinated more recently compared to participants vaccinated last year was 36% (95% CI: 17-52%). A Cox proportional hazards model showed similar results after adjusting for age and risk factors for severe COVID-19. Fortunately, only 19 severe cases were observed. While not significant, there was a numerical trend towards a lower rate of severe cases in the group vaccinated more recently (3.3 per 1000 person-years) compared to the group vaccinated last year (6.2 per 1000 person-years).” (read more)

Once you get locked in the vaccine roller coaster, you ain’t getting off until the ride’s over…

Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 13, 2021 | Sundance | 225 Comments

A rather remarkable situation in San Diego that we could see play out in the rest of the nation.  The police union, The San Diego Police Officers Association (SDPOA), asked their members about the vaccination mandate.

65 percent of the respondents said they would consider quitting the force if the city were to impose a requirement.  However, an alarming 45 percent said they would rather be fired than comply with the mandate.

The SDPOA has 1,971 members.  According to the San Diego Union Tribune, half of those officers are not vaccinated.  If that half of the entire police department were to be fired for non-compliance with the vaccine mandate, the city of San Diego would be in a really sketchy place.  The city has a deadline for compliance on November 2nd.

SAN DIEGO  —  About 90 percent of San Diego police officers who responded to a recent survey said they oppose COVID-19 vaccine mandates, and 65 percent of them said they would consider quitting the force if the city were to impose a requirement.

About 45 percent said they would rather be fired than comply with a mandate, according to the survey, which was conducted in the past week by the San Diego Police Officers Association. (read more)

We can imagine this same type of conversation is likely taking place in several cities and counties at the same time.  The police officers union was not present for the discussions with the Biden White House.  The US Postal Workers Union was present, and they were granted an exemption from the forced vaccine requirement.

PS….  what are they doing while everyone is overwhelmed and distracted by this?

Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 13, 2021 | Sundance | 194 Comments

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is putting himself in a direct confrontation with the federal government in order to protect workers in his state.

Earlier today Florida Governor Ron DeSantis repeated his threat to fine any entity, business, county, city or federal offices with a $5,000 fine -per incident- if they attempt to discriminate against unvaccinated employees, or threaten the employment status of non-vaccinated workers.

Appearing together with Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, DeSantis stated:  “If a government agency in the state of Florida forces a vaccine as a condition to employment, that violates Florida law and you will pay”…

Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 13, 2021 | Sundance | 115 Comments

Interesting data on SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) being released and discussed today.  The first is the release of a study [DATA HERE] indicating that half of all recorded hospitalization cases for COVID-19 are incorrectly being interpreted.

The study of 50,000 VA patients recorded as hospitalized and testing positive for COVID-19, reflects that roughly half of the patients recorded on the dashboard were admitted to the hospital for some other, unrelated, reason and incidentally tested positive for the virus upon admission.  They arrived for treatment for something else, were tested and recorded for COVID, but the treatment was not for any COVID-19 related issue.

An earlier study in May, using the charts of hospitalized pediatric patients found roughly the same thing; 40 to 45 percent of the patients recorded as COVID hospitalizations, when in reality they were in the hospital for something unrelated to COVID.   As noted in the Atlantic “For two separate studies published in May, doctors in California read through several hundred charts of pediatric patients, one by one, to figure out why, exactly, each COVID-positive child had been admitted to the hospital. Did they need treatment for COVID, or was there some other reason for admission, like cancer treatment or a psychiatric episode, and the COVID diagnosis was merely incidental? According to the researchers, 40 to 45 percent of the hospitalizations that they examined were for patients in the latter group.”

In the VA study released today approximately half of the COVID-19 recorded hospital cases had nothing to do with COVID-19. “[T]he study suggests that roughly half of all the hospitalized patients showing up on COVID-data dashboards in 2021 may have been admitted for another reason entirely, or had only a mild presentation of disease.” (link)

Meanwhile a group of scientists and researchers have published an article in The Lancet Medical Journal today recommending that any effort to introduce “booster shots” to supplement the experimental COVID-19 mRNA gene therapy, aka “the vaccine”, be stopped because the approach by the medical system ‘writ large’ is undermining confidence in the healthcare profession. [Lancet Article Here]

The scientists write: “The effectiveness of boosting against the main variants now circulating and against even newer variants could be greater and longer lived if the booster vaccine antigen is devised to match the main circulating variants,” following the same protocol as the annual flu vaccine (which is not based on gene modification).

As you can see directly in the wording of the medical scientists and researchers the underlying message is that if the mRNA genetic modification approach is to be continued, they will need modifications of the ‘vaccine‘ to match each specific strain of the virus.  This is exactly what critics of the vaccine approach have been saying openly for quite a while; however, it is the first admission by the scientific community of that reality.

Their scientific admission proves the point….. If you take the genetic modification approach (vaccines) to create artificial antibodies; thereby destroying the natural immunity antibodies; you are creating a scenario where the genetic modification of the immune system will need to continue (more boosters) in perpetuity for every variant.

The authors of the paper worry the aggregate world population will look at their dependency on boosters as a negative outcome.  As a result those who would consider getting the vaccine, which is really artificial genetic manipulation (hence mRNA), would have one more very substantive reason not to take the first dose.

Healthy people infected with both common sense and a generally reasonable distrust of government, who are not at high risk due to age or pre-existing conditions, can see that once you get locked into this type of vaccine ride you cannot get off until the ride or variants are over.  Ergo that political framework forms the basis for scientists to request the global/medical governing bodies to downplay the need for boosters right now.  [Lancet pdf here]

Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 13, 2021 | Sundance | 505 Comments

“Nice license you’ve got there Doc, it’d be a shame if something happened to it”…

That is the overwhelming threat message coming from the regulatory boards of the American medical establishment to all doctors operating in the U.S.   The professional threats have increased in direct proportion to the tone of threat from the White House.    The threats are intended to maintain the fear narrative behind COVID-19, and push all medical healthcare providers to carry only one acceptable opinion.

Before getting to the American Medical Association (AMA) statements and guidance, let’s first look at some of the threats from the specialty fields in the system.  Look at the last paragraph of this notification letter from the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM): (Source)

The ABEM specialty portal contains a link for people within the emergency room healthcare field to “report a violation” of the approved messaging.  Should an emergency room physician or healthcare provider (ie. nurse) make any statement that contradicts the governing authority, they will have their certification revoked.   Think about that.

Also, keep in mind, these are threats that only pertain to the delivery of healthcare in the United States, and the position of forced vaccination in America.  This is happening at the same time that other countries are abandoning the ‘exclusive vaccination approach‘, and are instead focusing on using their healthcare systems to keep people alive and healthy.

The U.K. appears to be following the advice of Sir Andrew Pollard, the Senior U.K. Vaccinologist in Great Britain, and will drop vaccine requirements and demands for a vaccine passport.  Pollard previously said the vaccine only approach was not working – the system needed to shift to protecting the population through therapeutics. [VIDEO HERE]  Pollard’s position is supported by the variants, and the fact that vaccinated people are now at greater risk for negative outcomes as their vaccine antibodies seem increasingly variant specific.

Denmark has also abandoned their previous closed approach which was predicated on masks, social distancing and vaccinations.  Denmark is reopening their society and shifting toward the model already taking place in Sweden.

Sweden has tackled COVID-19 through common sense, treatment and therapeutics, while focusing vaccination on those with pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable.  Sweden has been open and successful all year.  Their population has a healthy lifestyle, and high natural immunity.

However, the U.S. approach is exactly the opposite.   Our healthcare system is now threatening anyone who does not support the mandated vaccines.  It is creepy to the extreme.  Here’s another example:

(Source)

If the direct threats against U.S. doctors were not enough, a COVID watchdog group recently noted: “It appears that the Prep Act had been amended such that private hospitals and entities were covered in their actions taken with Covid-19  patients and relieved of all liability as long as they were prescribing ‘Covered Countermeasures’. ie. NIH approved medications. This may be why hospitals are refusing to use effective COVID treatments like vitamin D, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc” (link)

Under the HHS Notification, the PREP Act has been modified: “The amended Section VII adds that PREP Act liability protections also extend to Covered Persons for Recommended Activities that are related to any Covered Countermeasure that is:

1. licensed, approved, cleared, or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (or that is permitted to be used under an Investigational New Drug Application or an Investigational Device Exemption) under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act or Public Health Service (PHS) Act to treat, diagnose, cure, prevent, mitigate or limit the harm from COVID–19, or the transmission of SARS–CoV–2 or a virus mutating therefrom; (link)

The attachment of a liability or tort waiver to only cover FDA approved therapeutics is more pressure upon the doctors to stop any non approved patient treatment protocol due to coverage restrictions on their malpractice insurance.    These types of coercive pressures are evidence to support the claims of a nurse whistle-blower inside the system [VIDEO HERE]

Rounding out the latest examples of pressure to only comply with the vaccine protocol, the American Medical Association (AMA) has now produced updated guidance directly threatening all healthcare providers that do not force the vaccination into their patients.  [AMA Winter “Guidance”]

The level of propaganda is now beyond creepy: “Exemptions based on religious or philosophic grounds, or personal belief, endanger the health of the unvaccinated individual and the health of those in his or her group and the community at large.” (page 6)

The AMA, the largest medical governing body, is now taking the political position that the unvaccinated are a risk to the vaccinated?

(Full Guidance pdf)

Healthy people who have recovered from COVID-19 and carry natural immunity are being forced to have their immune system compromised by an mRNA “vaccine” (really gene therapy) that forever makes the recipient more vulnerable than they were with their own antibodies.    This makes absolutely no sense.

And all of this pressure to promote, force and mandate the gene therapy is wildly disproportionate to the threat the COVID-19 virus presents.

A significant percentage of those who originally took the vaccine shots are no longer comfortable with the new mantra that booster shots will be needed to deal with virus variants.   I consistently fall back on the single truest statement I have ever known in life: “The need for control is a reaction to fear!”

That control truism is most certainly evident amid those who have taken the vaccine.  The vaccinated crowd are severely angry with those who refuse to get in their cattle-car.   Control is a reaction to fear, and I cannot help but see the fear visible in those who have taken the vaccine.  Not all, but many of the vaccinated people need everyone in the same boat, because, God forbid, it comes out that vaccinated people have just unwittingly locked themselves into an irreversible state of perpetual health compromise.

If my healthy immune system is now a threat to your controlled and manipulated immune system – that ain’t my problem.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.  Think in terms or politics and society – the fear behind the eyes of Democrats is the fear that someone might withhold things (opportunities, money, whatever) from me, fear that if you live your life in a way I dislike, that it might affect my life.  They fear that if you get that job, there will be nothing left for them.  They fear that if you make tons of money, it’s means there’s less money out there for them.   So, people who believe in the world of leftist thought seek control as a means of trying to create guarantees and safeguards against those circumstances they fear.

Modern Democrats, leftists and Marxists, try to control the world and people to enable their comfort and happiness. Which, as we know, is an endless quest. Trying to control others does nothing in the way of making oneself happy. By extension, voting in this mindset so that government can try to control others will also – shocking – not lead to a happier, more comfortable life.

Ultimately the COVID-19 virus is not something to fear, it is something to treat.  Lose weight, get healthy, drink water, eat good foods, laugh often and keep active.

A healthy, happy, low stress life is one of the best immune systems you can build.  Not only against the threat of viruses, but also against the mindset of the perpetually aggrieved – ie. modern Democrats.