Paul Klee In the Houses of Saint Germain 1932
What an incredible mess.
In January, 2020, when the World Health Organization insisted that COVID-19 wasn’t transmissible between humans, and Dr. Anthony Fauci said that the risk to the American public from the virus was “low,” officials at the National Institutes of Health were scrambling to perform damage control after a controversial – and now withdrawn – study suggested that there were HIV-like ‘insertions’ included in SARS-CoV-2. The study, “Uncanny similarity of unique inserts on the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag,” posited that segments of the virus’s RNA had no relation to other coronaviruses such as SARS, and instead appeared to be closer to HIV. Specifically:
“To further investigate if these inserts are present in any other corona virus, we performed a multiple sequence alignment of the spike glycoprotein amino acid sequences of all available coronaviruses (n=55) [refer Table S.File1] in NCBI refseq (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) this includes one sequence of 2019-nCoV[Fig.S1]. We found that these 4 insertions [inserts 1, 2, 3 and 4] are unique to 2019-nCoV and are not present in other coronaviruses analyzed. … We then translated the aligned genome and found that these inserts are present in all Wuhan 2019-nCoV viruses except the 2019-nCoV virus of Bat as a host [Fig.S4]. Intrigued by the 4 highly conserved inserts unique to 2019-nCoV we wanted to understand their origin. For this purpose, we used the 2019-nCoV local alignment with each insert as query against all virus genomes and considered hits with 100% sequence coverage. Surprisingly, each of the four inserts aligned with short segments of the Human immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1) proteins.”
The now-withdrawn paper piqued the interest of several journalists, including Zero Hedge (whose account Twitter banned one day after we updated our coverage of the article, claiming we ‘doxed’ a Chinese scientist in an earlier report). Thanks to a recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for Fauci’s emails, we now know that the National Institutes of Health was not only aware of the Indian report, but were actively discussing how to handle it. A January 31 email from AFP’s Issam Ahmed asks NIH immunologist Dr. Barney Graham for comment: “I was told by a contact you may be willing to give an opinion of this paper that has just gone live. It suggests the new Coronavirus has four inserts similar to HIV-1 and this is not a coincidence,” reads the email.
Graham immediately forwards the correspondence to the Office of Communications and Government Relations (OCGR), saying “This is one we don’t want to answer without high-level input, but wanted you to know about the rising controversy.”
That same Sunday morning, Fauci is looped in – with Sir Jeremy Farrar forwarding Zero Hedge’s article after mentioning how World Health Organization Director Tedros Adhanom and the organization’s cabinet chief were in ‘conclave’ – ostensibly on how to manage the narrative – noting “If they do prevaricate [bullshit the public], I would appreciate a call with you later tonight or tomorrow to think how we might take forward.” “Do you have a minute for a quick call?” Fauci replies, after having called the Indian paper “really outlandish.”
“We killed 300,000 Americans for the express purpose of getting EUAs issued for vaccines..”
On 12/7/2020 I put forward that we had scientific evidence on how to slam the door on Covid-19’s transmission. We knew in October from the study I cited that there was a simple and near-zero cost way to do it. In mid-October the death count in the US stood at about 200,000. We did nothing. Why did we do nothing? Because if we admitted to the existence of this study, which was registered formally on the government’s clinical trial site, and followed what it told us to do, there would be no EUAs for vaccines. They would have been illegal. The FDA knew this, the NIH knew this and the CDC knew this since the trial database in question is run by the US Government. All three were fully-aware that there was a cheap, easy and immediate way to slam the door on transmission of Covid-19 and had been tested in a health-care setting – that is, where people are around folks who are known infectious all the time.
Our government, medical and political systems deliberately ignored the scientific evidence and a formal clinical trial which our government had registered and for which results posted in October of 2020. We did this and as a direct result more than 300,000 additional people died. We now know they died and the virus spread as a direct result of that willful and intentional act. We know this because now there is a further study that proves not only did the drug work to cut fatalities it also cuts off viral transmission dramatically and almost-immediately when used, which means had we used it the case rate would have never surged in the winter at all and a huge percentage of the people who died would have never got the virus at all.
In a multivariable logistic regression model, the odds of a negative test at day 6 was 2.62 time higher in the ivermectin group (95% CI: 1.06 to 6.45). Cultures at days 2 to 6 were positive in 3/23 (13.0%) of ivermectin samples vs. 14/29 (48.2%) in the placebo group (p=0.008). If the culture is negative you cannot transmit the virus to someone else because whatever you have in your body cannot grow in that person or any other person. Forward transmission capability within two days of administration of this cheap drug went from 48% -> 13%, a 73% reduction. Cutting off transmission within 48 hours of administering the drug would have stopped the winter spike from occurring.
Offering Ivermectin to all who tested positive and everyone in their household would have slammed the door instantly on forward transmission and ended the pandemic in the United States before the winter surge occurred. We now know this at a scientific level of certainty. [..] We killed 300,000 Americans for the express purpose of getting EUAs issued for vaccines. Leaving aside whether the vaccines are safe, and giving them full credit for being effective the fact still remains that our government and health care system killed 300,000 people by refusing to follow the science, that refusal was intentional and undertaken for financial reasons, and as a direct result a genocide-level manslaughter took place.
The guy’s soon 80 years old. Why do it?
Dr. Anthony Fauci’s celebrity status has skyrocketed during the Covid-19 pandemic, and he’s continuing to cash in on his cult of personality with a new “life philosophy” book. Fauci has been the face of the battle against the Covid-19 pandemic in the US through two incredibly different administrations. Considering the fact that he has been in that position through such uncertain times, one would assume he’d be a trusted, beloved figure, and he is – to some. Take a scroll through social media or look at recent polling on the man, and it’s clear he is as divisive as the politicians he stands next to. One poll last month found that the majority of people who identify as Republicans say he has “hurt” the US more than helped during the pandemic. Democrats remain much more faithful to the man, with a separate poll finding that 80% of them feel the infectious disease expert is doing a good or excellent job.
Fauci has been undeterred by this mixed response and simply leaned in on his celebrity status. While so many have struggled through the pandemic, Fauci’s smiling face could be seen in numerous cable news interviews, almost daily, at press conferences, throwing first pitches at baseball games, on magazine covers – he’s been treated as the “American hero” Jill Biden recently described him as. Now, we are subjected to the latest extension of his celebrity with an upcoming book entitled, ‘Expect the Unexpected: Ten Lessons on Truth, Service, and the Way Forward’. Compiled through “hours of interviews,” Fauci will give us his personal “life philosophy” through the read, as well as “universal advice to live by.” It is set to hit shelves on November 2, and you can bet Fauci will be making the media rounds to promote it.
“..the case rate was collapsing by the end of the month, down by more than 50% over those two weeks, yet not a single person was immune by virtue of vaccination on January 1st 2021. Not one.”
How about early treatment and intervention? HCQ/Doxycycline/Zinc? Ivermectin? Budesonide? Others? All have shown some efficacy. Remdesivir, on the other hand, only usable in a hospital, has shown none in a very large trial (Solidarity.) Whadda ‘ya mean there are no studies? What do you call those three links above and why were they not offered to patients every single time? Why doesn’t the person who has a disease get to choose? There is highly-credible evidence behind early treatment which began in the first few months of the outbreak; Florida near Palm Beach with Ivermectin, Michigan’s Henry Ford Hospital System with HCQ, a doctor in Texas with Budesonide, a confirmatory study on that run out of Australia and then very large populations that have used them such as India and Mexico City with several nations and provinces within nations telling the ghouls to stuff it over the last few months when the other path, relying on vaccines and expensive on-patent drugs like Remdesivir in the hospitals, did not stop the infections and death.
You want to know why Twitter doesn’t like people talking about those things? Ever look at their ads on their mobile app? Half of them are from pharma companies advocating this or that brand new, expensive drug. Gee, no problem there, right? Watch TV? How many pharma ads do you see there? Ever see an ad for an off-patent, cheap drug for something? You never have and never will — there’s no money in it.
[..] It takes 2 weeks after the second dose before you’re “protected.” The peak was on January 8th. The first doses went into arms on December 14th, so zero people had received two doses by the 8th of January and had it become effective, and more-damning was the beginning of actual vaccination in real people on a national basis was right around that time — yet no vaccine is effective instantly. The peak here in this county for cases was in fact on the 14th of December. A literal zero persons had been vaccinated before that day; the case rate was collapsing by the end of the month, down by more than 50% over those two weeks, yet not a single person was immune by virtue of vaccination on January 1st 2021. Not one. What’s the truth about epidemics like this — respiratory viruses — all through history?
Never has one been trouble in any material size for more than a handful of years – like two, occasionally with a “gap” in the middle. All are characterized by two waves or less, the second frequently more-severe. 1889-92, which looks to have been HCoV-OC43 (unproved), also a coronavirus, was two waves. 1918 was two waves. The 1957 pandemic was two waves, both roughly equally severe. 2009 H1N1 was two waves but, contrary to expectations, was mild. There is no evidence — zero — for any of the ten for which reasonably-contemporary records exist showing any deviation from this pattern. Every single one for which such records exist has burned itself out within two years and/or two phases or waves. Repeat: Covid-19 was over in the United States in December before the first stab went into the first arm. The first wave was in early 2020 and the second came in the winter which peaked before anyone could be vaccinated.
“After a new infection, short-lived cells – called plasmablasts – are an early source of antibodies. But, they disappear soon after the body fights off the virus, and other longer-lasting cells make the antibodies.”
If you’ve had COVID-19, you’ve likely been told that your antibodies last a few weeks, or months, at the maximum. However, new research suggests that many will make antibodies against the virus for most of their lives. Researchers have identified long-lasting cells, which produce antibodies, in the bone marrow of people who have recovered from the virus, per Nature. The study provides evidence that immunity will last longer than once thought. “The implications are that vaccines will have the same durable effect,” Menno van Zelm, an immunologist at Monash University in Australia, said. Antibodies are the key to immune defense, as they essentially serve as a block for the virus. After a new infection, short-lived cells – called plasmablasts – are an early source of antibodies.
But, they disappear soon after the body fights off the virus, and other longer-lasting cells make the antibodies. “A plasma cell is our life history, in terms of the pathogens we’ve been exposed to,” Ali Ellebedy, an immunologist at Washington University in St. Louis who led the study, said. Ellebedy’s team tracked antibody production in 77 people who recovered from mild cases of COVID-19. Indeed, antibodies plummeted in the four months after the infection, but the decline slowed and up to eleven months after infection, antibodies were still present. While this is critical information, it remains unclear what antibody levels will look like in the long term. “We’re early in the game,” said Rafi Ahmed, an immunologist at Emory University. “We’re not looking at 5 years, 10 years after infection.”
“The only people rejecting the proper course of conduct was the mainstream media, aided by the clown show that is Adam Schiff.”
When President Biden recently revealed a schism in the intelligence community over the origins of the COVID-19 virus — with some now seeing it plausible a lab leak caused the pandemic — he did far more than just order a 90-day review. He acknowledged implicitly that the prevailing assessment of America’s spy agencies during the last year of Donald Trump’s presidency — that the virus evolved in nature – was now fully in question. Rep. Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, went a step further and revealed some U.S. intelligence analysts believed the virus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology much earlier but their views were suppressed from policymakers.
The COVID origins evolution echoes in some respects the deeply flawed Russia collusion probe, when the FBI dove headfirst into an election-year dossier funded by Hillary Clinton and opened a probe of Trump adviser Carter Page even as the CIA warned Christopher Steele’s intelligence was Moscow-fed disinformation and Page was one of the Agency’s own assets. The parallels have some questioning whether the intelligence community can still operate with clear eyes and give policymakers a 360-degree view of issues, including dissenting analysis, in this hyper-partisan era of America. “Our intelligence community doesn’t need another 90 days to assess the origins of the coronavirus,” said Fred Fleitz, a longtime intelligence analyst and former chief of staff to the National Security Council.
“There has long been enough open-source information to conclude with high confidence that the virus originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” Fleitz said the intelligence community ombudsman has already concluded that spy agencies “deliberately played down and omitted intelligence” that China tried to meddle in the 2020 presidential election because they did not want to produce analysis that supported President Trump’s policies. “I believe it is very likely the same thing happened with the IC’s analysis of the coronavirus origin and the Chinese coverup,” he said.
Kash Patel, a former National Security Council adviser to Trump, said the failure to properly report on the origins of COVID-19 is the latest episode showing the intelligence community and the mainstream media taking positions contrary to Trump’s for reasons other than facts. “Every single time President Trump had the intelligence correct and based policy decisions in sound reasoning,” Patel said. “The only people rejecting the proper course of conduct was the mainstream media, aided by the clown show that is Adam Schiff.” While Biden has given American spy agencies 90 days to give the latest assessment, there is growing proof that the U.S. intelligence community had access to contrary evidence when it gave its first assessment in April 2020 that COVID-19 likely evolved from nature.
“The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,” the ODNI said on April 30, 2020. President Trump and his advisers vehemently disagreed with the assessment, continuing to insist the most likely source of the virus was a lab leak.
“Scientists say UK faces ‘perilous moment’ as Delta Covid variant now makes up 75% of cases..”
Downing Street believes early data shows England can forge ahead with the 21 June unlocking despite a chorus of warnings from scientists about rising case rates linked to the Delta variant first identified in India. Matt Hancock, the health secretary, said there were encouraging signs vaccines were breaking the link between infections and hospitalisations as Public Health England announced zero daily reported Covid deaths for the first time since last summer. Boris Johnson is understood to be optimistic about the current data but a No 10 source said the next few days would be crucial to assess the impact of the unlocking that took place from 17 May – though early data did not show significant cause for alarm. “There is obviously concern about case numbers but we still need to see if that is translating to hospitalisations and deaths or if the vaccine is breaking that link,” the source said.
“At the moment we do not have evidence that definitively suggests we should delay.” The business minister Paul Scully also expressed “cautious optimism”. He told Times Radio the government did not want to have to roll back restrictions again. “One thing that we saw last year, before Christmas, was the stop-start nature just didn’t work for businesses and cost them more. So we’ve got to get it absolutely right. People’s jobs and livelihoods depend on it.” However, the government’s former chief scientific adviser, Prof Sir Mark Walport, said on Tuesday it was “not impossible” that the country was in the foothills of a new wave as the Delta variant takes over, accounting for three-quarters of new cases. “It is a quite perilous moment, but we’ve just got to keep our fingers crossed that the measures work,” he said. A series of other scientists have echoed his concerns.
“Macron’s position depends on the time of day or what’s in the newspaper that morning,”
The Biden administration’s newfound support for waiving intellectual property rights on COVID-19 vaccines could prove to be a turning point in the fight against the pandemic and a major step forward for health care access in the Global South. But before that, the effort needs to overcome a hefty roadblock: hostility from the European Union. Any legally-binding suspension of global patents on vaccines requires unanimous support from the World Trade Organization’s commission on IP rights, better known as the TRIPS Council, slated to meet June 8-9 in Geneva. While the United States said in May that it was finally interested in negotiating a proposal to do just that, signs suggest the European Commission — the executive branch of the EU, which has forged close ties with the pharmaceutical industry — will likely continue to oppose a proposed waiver on vaccines.
Pharmaceutical interests have become one of the biggest lobbying forces in Europe, according to spending disclosures reviewed by The Daily Poster. “Internationally, there’s a real risk that the European Union could make this drag out, that their actions in Geneva and at the World Trade Organization could lead to a serious delay,” says Kenneth Haar, a researcher at the Corporate Europe Observatory, a watchdog tracking corporate influence in the EU. “That’s a huge problem because time is of the essence.” [..] While at least two European governments, that of Spain and Poland, have publicly thrown their support behind a waiver since Washington’s about-face, the EU’s twin power brokers have yet to come around.
Despite some initial enthusiasm from French President Emmanuel Macron following Biden’s announcement, his government has yet to endorse a waiver of IP rights, while Germany hasn’t appeared to budge at all from its opposition. “With France, you never know, Macron’s position depends on the time of day or what’s in the newspaper that morning,” says Haar. “But officially, the French position is not in favor and they’re backing Merkel on this.”
It’s a small world.
In the wake of lightning fast authorisations of covid-19 vaccines in the UK and the US, public health officials have worked hard to maintain confidence in these new products. British and American officials have emphasised the independence of the experts who authorise vaccines and those who issue advice on them. But an investigation by The BMJ has found that some of these experts have significant industry ties that government agencies do not always disclose. [..] In some cases, an expert has made a disclosure but the committee has not deemed it a conflict. For example, in the case of the UK’s JCVI, the chair of the covid-19 meeting is Wei Shen Lim, a professor at the Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, who JCVI says has “no registered conflicts of interest.” The same document, however, further states that Lim’s “institution has received unrestricted investigator-initiated research funding from Pfizer for a study in pneumonia in which Professor Lim is the chief investigator (non-vaccine related).” And in a preprint published only months before the JCVI’s December meeting, Lim reported this Pfizer grant.
[..] For example, Open Payments reported that Arnold Monto, professor at the University of Michigan School of Public Health and acting chair for the FDA s covid vaccine authorisation meetings, had received over $24, 000 in payments from drug companies in 2019. That same year, Open Payments reports that Myron Levine, a panellist from the University of Maryland School of Medicine, received about $30, 000, mostly in consulting fees. In 2019, Open Payments reports, Robert Schooley of the University of California at San Diego received over $25,000 in payments. It also reports that Ofer Levy at Boston Children’s Hospital received $5500 in mostly travel expenses from GSK. And in a 2020 publication Levy disclosed that he was a named inventor on several patent applications related to vaccine adjuvants.
[..] Joel Lexchin of York University in Toronto, who publishes research on conflicts of interest, says, “Twelve months is really quite short. I think that’s not acceptable.” He also suggests that government agencies should publish everything that experts disclose to them, instead of picking and choosing what to make public. “The best policy is disclose everything,” he says. “Second best, pretty far down, is to have clear rules about why certain things don’t need to be disclosed.” Schooley explains that the various time windows required by different disclosure policies can make it appear that an academic has reported financial interests in one case but not in another. More consistent disclosure policies are needed, he says—and universities, agencies, and journals should come together to normalise standards. “If all of this were harmonised, it would improve transparency and reduce the time required for all involved,” he wrote to The BMJ. “In the meantime, we can try to answer each request as best we can based on how we interpret each query.”
“Then, Obama held a White House meeting with bank CEOs to tell them “help me help you.”
Former President Barack Obama wants you to now believe that he was actually mad about giant Wall Street handouts that he voted for, then arm twisted lawmakers to expand — and then rescinded when some of the money might have gone to help homeowners. Obama’s foray into pure fiction is not only absurd — it is a reminder that history can repeat itself if we allow reality to be memory-holed. Obama’s comments came in a new interview with the New York Times’ Ezra Klein. “When we came into office, the economy was in a free fall,” the former president said. “We had to scramble and do a bunch of stuff, some of which was inherited, some of which we initiated to stabilize the financial system. People hated it. It’s hard to just underscore how much the bank bailouts just angered everyone, including me.”
Obama had an odd method of expressing his alleged rage. During the 2008 campaign, he made a public spectacle of leaving the campaign trail to cast a Senate vote for the no-strings-attached bank bailout. A few months later, Politico reported: “Not yet in the White House but working the phones as if he were, Barack Obama won a crucial Senate vote Thursday clearing the release of $350 billion more in bailout funds from the Treasury Department’s controversial financial rescue program. For the incoming president, the 52-42 roll call represented a first major test of strength, and Obama threw himself into the fight, reaching out to senators on both sides of the aisle and making calls until he had won all but one of the seven Democratic freshmen elected in November.”
Then, Obama held a White House meeting with bank CEOs to tell them “help me help you.” He used his bully pulpit to stop his own party’s efforts to prevent the bailout from subsidizing massive bonus payouts to AIG. And when some of that bank bailout money might have been redirected into helping homeowners who were getting thrown out of their homes, Obama signed legislation to rescind his own authority to spend the cash on such a priority. Official Washington then pretended the bailouts were actually paid back, even though that self-serving talking point is complete bullshit.
Update (2002 ET): The USDA has released an important update about the Biden administration’s steps to mitigate potential supply constraints and price surges following JBS’ ransomware attack.
As noted earlier today by the White House, USDA is aware of the ransomware attack against JBS, which is affecting the company’s operations, including its facilities in the United States. USDA continues to work closely with the White House, Department of Homeland Security, JBS USA and others to monitor this situation closely and offer help and assistance to mitigate any potential supply or price issues. As part of that effort, USDA has reached out to several major meat processors in the United States to ensure they are aware of the situation, encouraging them to accommodate additional capacity where possible, and to stress the importance of keeping supply moving.
USDA has also been in contact with several food, agriculture and retail organizations to underscore the importance of maintaining close communication and working together to ensure a stable, plentiful food supply. USDA will continue to encourage food and agriculture companies with operations in the United States to take necessary steps to protect their IT and supply chain infrastructure so that it is more durable, distributed and better able to withstand modern challenges, including cybersecurity threats and disruptions.
We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.
Born in 1832 (5 years prior to the coronation of Queen Victoria), Jonathan the Tortoise is due to turn 190 years old in 2022. That makes him the oldest-known land animal alive today
Support the Automatic Earth in virustime. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.