Welcome to Sott.net
Sun, 04 Dec 2022
The World for People who Think

Health & Wellness

Heart - Black

The pharmaceutical industry is dangerous to health - further proof with COVID-19

pharma vaccine america
© AFP / Ed Jones

The COVID-19 period highlights a huge problem that has been developing for decades, the control of science by industry. In the 1950s, the tobacco industry set the example, which the pharmaceutical industry followed. Since then, the latter has been regularly condemned for illegal marketing, misrepresentation of experimental results, dissimulation of information about the dangers of drugs, and considered as criminal. Therefore, this study was conducted to show that knowledge is powerfully manipulated by harmful corporations, whose goals are: 1/financial; 2/to suppress our ability to make choices to acquire global control of public health.


Pharmaceutical industry techniques for manipulating science and COVID-19 reporting were reviewed. Several sources of official documents were used: PubMed; National Institutes of Health resources; pharmaceutical companies; policy documents; national newspapers and news agencies; and books by prominent professionals (scientific and legal). A few studies have not been published in peer-reviewed journals; however, they have been conducted by reputable scientists in their respective fields.


Since the beginning of COVID-19, we can list the following methods of information manipulation which have been used: falsified clinical trials and inaccessible data; fake or conflict-of-interest studies; concealment of vaccines' short-term side effects and total lack of knowledge of the long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccination; doubtful composition of vaccines; inadequate testing methods; governments and international organizations under conflicts of interest; bribed physicians; the denigration of renowned scientists; the banning of all alternative effective treatments; unscientific and liberticidal social methods; government use of behavior modification and social engineering techniques to impose confinements, masks, and vaccine acceptance; scientific censorship by the media.


By supporting and selecting only the one side of science information while suppressing alternative viewpoints, and with obvious conflicts of interest revealed by this study, governments and the media constantly disinform the public. Consequently, the unscientifically validated vaccination laws, originating from industry-controlled medical science, led to the adoption of social measures for the supposed protection of the public but which became serious threats to the health and freedoms of the population.


New study shows majority of Americans dying of COVID are vaccinated

pregnant face mask vaccination
The majority of Americans dying from Covid are vaccinated according to a new study, prompting a leading health policy nonprofit to concede that "we can no longer say this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated."

According to an analysis conducted for The Washington Post by Cynthia Cox, vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, 58 percent of August 2022 Covid deaths were people who were vaccinated or boosted.

Comment: This most recent study is just one to add to the growing list of evidence demonstrating the dangers of COVID vaccination:


The lockdown cancer wave has only just begun

elderly patient
© Getty Images
The underreported story of the entire pandemic is excess deaths — not from Covid, but from other health conditions which were so brutally pushed to one side. There have been huge rises in the number of people dying from causes unrelated to the virus, accelerating throughout the year and showing no signs of slowing down.

To begin with, it was driven by diabetes, cardiac issues and a handful of other concerns — but recently the number of people dying from cancer is starting to increase considerably above what is expected. Will this continue? Nobody can say for sure, but I suspect it will for many years to come.

When I outlined the scale of the cancer crisis previously on Twitter, various voices took great pleasure in pointing out that cancer deaths weren't rising — I don't hear from them anymore. Indeed, many of the more vocal lockdown commentators are actively drawing attention to the problem now.

Cancer is slow, but it's relentless. An undiagnosed tumour won't cause severe complications in days or weeks. But if it's left untreated for a year or two then the odds of survival drop precipitously. I fear that those lockdown delays are now starting to bite.

Comment: Cancer is only one tip of the health iceberg to come.

See also: Europe faces 'cancer epidemic' after estimated 1m cases went undiagnosed during Covid lockdowns


The truth about ivermectin

© Luis Robayo/AFP via Getty Images
A healthcare worker holds a bottle of ivermectin in Colombia on July 21, 2020.
Ivermectin has been hailed as a "wonder drug" and, according to the UNESCO World Science Report, a critical component of "one of the most triumphant public health campaigns ever waged in the developing world."

However, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and affiliated health authorities have vociferously recommended against ivermectin as a potential treatment for the virus.

Though the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved ivermectin for human use in treating conditions caused by parasites, it has also insisted that ivermectin "has not been shown to be safe or effective" when it comes to treating COVID-19.

Comment: See also:


Rapid waning and short-lived immunity: It's time to rethink COVID booster shots, Israeli researchers say

israel nurse vaccine
© Jack Guez/AFP via Getty Images
An Israeli nurse receives a fourth dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at the Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan near Tel Aviv, on Dec. 27, 2021.
An Israeli study found that antibody levels after a fourth dose of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine returned to similar levels as after the 3rd dose after about four months.

The study, conducted among health care workers at the Sheba Medical Center, the largest hospital in Israel, found that the immunological protection of the 4th dose "was much smaller and had waned completely by 13 weeks after vaccination."

It found "no substantial additional effectiveness over a third dose at 15 to 26 weeks after vaccination."

Comment: So the vaccines offer a little bump in immunity, followed by a crash below baseline. The effect is increased with every shot. So why are vaccines still recommended?

See also:


Higher incidence of myocarditis, pericarditis found after COVID-19 vaccination


Endomyocardial biopsy showing lymphocytic myocarditis.
A recent study found a higher incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis in patients following COVID-19 vaccination, which was greater following the second dose compared with the first dose; however, the study noted that the risk for these conditions is significantly lower than the health risks seen in patients with COVID-19, highlighting the need for a risk-benefit analysis in certain patients. The increased incidence of pericarditis or myocarditis was noted mainly in those who received BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and no increased risks were found in other types of COVID-19 vaccines.

Comment: It's up to the individual to decide whether the possible adverse events from vaccination are worth the known risks.

"Compared to those who did not receive COVID-19 vaccine, those who received either the first or second dose had a significantly increased risk of myocarditis or pericarditis," the study authors wrote. "In addition, those who received the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine had a higher risk of myocarditis/pericarditis compared with those who received only the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine."

Comment: See also:


Doctors ask Biden to declare emergency over RSV surge among children

rsv baby ventilator
Pediatricians are calling on President Joe Biden to declare an emergency in response to an "alarming surge" in respiratory viruses, including respiratory syncytial virus or RSV, that has been straining children's hospitals across the country.

The Children's Hospital Association and American Academy of Pediatrics urged Biden to issue an emergency declaration this week that would give hospitals more flexibility to manage the influx of patients and free up federal resources, such as those provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

"We need emergency funding support and flexibilities along the same lines of what was provided to respond to COVID surges," read a letter from the groups to Biden and Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra.

Comment: See also:


BMI: why experts are calling for better ways of assessing health than a body mass index

rabbit food
© Dreamer Company/Getty Images/iStockphoto
One PhD thesis found that people who focused on a healthy lifestyle, regardless of their body mass index (BMI), had more nourishing dietary patterns.
The index has remained popular because of its simplicity, but Australian experts agree it is too often seen as a one-stop indicator of health.

Most of us are no stranger to the body mass index: weight in kilograms divided by height in metres squared.

At a population level, research tells us that having a higher BMI is associated with a greater risk of certain conditions, such as type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure. Rates of obesity, according to the World Health Organisation, have tripled globally since 1975.

But despite being enthusiastically adopted in doctors' rooms and also by average people to quantify their own body composition, BMI is much less useful as an individual health indicator.

Comment: Measuring the health of an individual is very complicated, and a quick calculation using two parameters is entirely insufficient in doing the job. BMI is not a health measurement and shouldn't be treated as such.

See also: How Flawed And Outdated Is The Body Mass Index (BMI) Measurement?


Red meat is not a health risk. New study slams years of shoddy research

red meat healthy
© niloo / Adobe Stock
Studies have been linking red meat consumption to health problems like heart disease, stroke, and cancer for years. But nestled in the recesses of those published papers are notable limitations.

Nearly all the research is observational, unable to tease out causation convincingly. Most are plagued by confounding variables. For example, perhaps meat eaters simply eat fewer vegetables, or tend to smoke more, or exercise less? Moreover, many are based on self-reported consumption. The simple fact is that people can't remember what they eat with any accuracy. And lastly, the reported effect sizes in these scientific papers are often small. Is a supposed 15% greater risk of cancer really worth worrying about?


Puberty blockers may have severe longterm effects on kids

trans rights
© AP Photo/Armando Franca
Recent studies provide evidence on the effects of puberty blockers on kids, a field where hitherto there has been little to no longterm data or research. And the results are sobering. It turns out trying to tamper with natural biology has bad and sometimes permanent longterm consequences. Who would have thought?

Surprisingly, it's the New York Times that published an in-depth piece seeking to answer the question: "They Paused Puberty, but Is There a Cost?" The cost not only comes in delayed sexual development but in serious effects such as permanently retarded bone growth, infertility, and potential retarded brain development.

"Many physicians in the United States and elsewhere are prescribing blockers to patients at the first stage of puberty — as early as age 8 — and allowing them to progress to sex hormones as soon as 12 or 13," the Times said (emphasis added). But yet, "the United States had produced no data on the impact or safety of blockers, particularly among transgender patients under 12." There are 300,000 "trans" young Americans between the ages of 13 and 17, the Times reported, and an unknown number younger than that. That's a whole lot of children potentially seeking these treatments. So puberty blockers were being used on kids as young as eight, with no data on the safety and side effects? How is that allowed?

Comment: Back in October when Florida banned 'puberty blockers' and 'sex reassignment surgeries' for minors, Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo had this to say:
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo slammed the federal guidance as a political move that lacks of evidence of assisting youths.

"The federal government's medical establishment releasing guidance failing at the most basic level of academic rigor shows that this was never about health care," Ladapo said in a statement. "It was about injecting political ideology into the health of our children. Children experiencing gender dysphoria should be supported by family and seek counseling, not pushed into an irreversible decision before they reach 18."

The state guidance added that "[s]ystematic reviews on hormonal treatment for young people show a trend of low-quality evidence, small sample sizes, and medium to high risk of bias."
See also: FDA officials warn of brain swelling, vision loss in minors using puberty blockers