Yesterday The Telegraph published an article about the Right and Honourable Baroness Heather Hallett DBE's 1,531-page COVID-19 inquiry which concluded that 2020 lockdowns could have been "avoided entirely" had the government imposed "stringent restrictions" such as social distancing and face masks sooner and more decisively. By the way, for anyone impressed by Ms. HH's nobility, know that you too can be a noble. You can buy the title of baron or baroness at this link.
Here's the gist of Ms. HH's conclusions:

"Had stringent restrictions short of a mandatory lockdown been introduced earlier than March 16th 2020 - when the number of COVID-19 cases was lower - the mandatory lockdown might have been shorter or, conceivably, avoided entirely. ... At the very least, there would have been time to establish what the effect of those restrictions on levels of incidence were and whether there was a sustained reduction in social contact. This would have enabled the governments to assess whether stringent restrictions short of a lockdown would suffice to prevent health services across the UK being overwhelmed and whether they were therefore a feasible policy option."

The right and honourable baroness quoted Mark Woolhouse, a Professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, who told the inquiry that "more proportionate and sustainable interventions" such as contact tracing, self-isolation, face coverings and respiratory hygiene, should have been introduced "as early as March 4th 2020."

The UK's Covid Enquiry has published its second report, and its conclusion is as relevant as it is predictable.

To quote Sky News:

The response of the UK's four governments to the pandemic was a "repeated case of too little, too late" and tens of thousands of lives could have been saved had lockdowns been introduced faster, the COVID-19 Inquiry has found

That's all they were ever going to say, and it's all we really need to know.

The full report is over seven hundred and fifty pages across two volumes, a Tolstoy novel of irrelevance.

This is the point of formal inquiries, months of quasi-meaningless testimony whose only purpose is to eat up time until the public memory has faded, then lend verisimilitude to the pre-written revisionist conclusion.

For anyone contemplating getting an influenza vaccine (flu shot) or planning to pressure or mandate someone else to get one:

A meta-analysis of existing flu shot studies of healthy children by Cochrane (effectively owned by vaccine zealot Bill Gates) concluded that despite decades of published studies, it "could find no convincing evidence that [flu] vaccines can reduce mortality, hospital admissions, serious complications, or community transmission of influenza."

Read that carefully: no convincing evidence — none — that flu shots lowered the chances of dying, being admitted to the hospital, suffering serious complications from the flu, or transmitting the flu to others.

In fact, studies have found those vaccinated for flu have a statistically significant increased rate of respiratory illnesses. Meaning, it increases the risk of having other respiratory illnesses.

For example, a placebo-controlled efficacy (not safety) study by researchers at the University of Hong Kong compared children receiving influenza vaccine with those who did not receive the vaccine. The study found no statistical difference in the rate of influenza between the groups but did find the vaccinated had a four times increased rate of non-influenza infections ("recipients had an increased risk of virologically confirmed non-influenza infections (relative risk: 4.40; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-14.8)").

Donald Trump just got his latest "COVID" shot. This indicates he still believes that these shots are vaccines - which is not far-removed from believing in Yogic Flying. (Just believe hard enough and you'll fly!)

It'd be funny were it not for what it implies about Trump's views regarding these drugs, which he has steadfastly refused to repudiate and implicitly endorses by taking them (assuming he actually did take them; it's possible it's all for show). If the president takes these drugs, then what does the president think about those who prefer not to?

Probably that they're "losers" and "stupid."

His defenders - some of them - say he never actually forced these drugs on anyone; that he merely facilitated the Warp Speeding of them and deserves credit for that because (so these some say) the availability of these drugs ended the "pandemic." More finely, they claim the availability of the drugs ended the lockdowns and the endless (so it seemed at the time) attempt to force the Face Diapering forever of the entire population. The drugs made it possible to end the Face Diapering and all the rest - so some say. Never mind that it didn't. The Memory Hole is deep. People were being pressured to Diaper long after the drugs came out; including people who had taken the drugs.

My personal experiences seem to lag a bit behind the general population. I have not, until recently, noticed too many people succumbing to strange cancers. Now, quite a few have come up in my personal life, as well as in my professional life (experiences of my psychotherapy patients).

We have, of course, heard for years that one of the fallouts from the irresponsible release of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine was the possibility of increased cases of all sorts of cancers. Reports from doctors to support this reality have increased over the years, and of course, our personal experiences with friends and family, and news reports of people dying of cancer in mysterious ways (too young, death too quickly, rare cancers) have corroborated the doctors' concerns.

Proponents of this view argue that the vaccines, introduced globally in late 2020, have triggered an unprecedented increase in cancer diagnoses, particularly among younger individuals, with cancers presenting as unusually aggressive and resistant to treatment. They point to anecdotal reports from clinicians and pathologists who claim to have observed a rise in rare and rapidly progressing cancers, such as cholangiocarcinoma, lymphomas, and triple-negative breast cancer, since the vaccine rollout.

For instance, Dr. William Makis, a Canadian oncologist, has publicly stated that he and colleagues have seen an "explosion" of such cases, particularly in vaccinated individuals, describing cancers that progress so rapidly that patients often die within weeks of diagnosis. Similarly, Dr. Angus Dalgleish, an oncologist in the UK, has expressed concerns about the resurgence of cancers in previously stable patients following booster doses, suggesting a potential immune system disruption caused by the vaccines. These are just a few examples among what I would expect to be many.

The proposed mechanisms linking mRNA vaccines to "turbo cancers" often center on the spike protein produced by the vaccine or the presence of trace contaminants like Simian Virus 40 (SV40) DNA fragments. Some argue that the spike protein may induce chronic inflammation or impair immune surveillance, potentially reactivating latent oncogenic viruses like Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) or human papillomavirus (HPV), which are known to contribute to certain cancers.

Readers of the Tusk know I've spent the better part of my life digging into heretical science — research that the mainstream either refuses to look at or pretends doesn't exist. From the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis to the possibility of pre-Ice Age high technology, we've always asked the forbidden questions and followed the data wherever it leads.

This week, I've taken that same instinct — what some would call a contrarian reflex — and pointed it in a new direction: one that hits close to home.

I've published an op-ed in the Carolina Journal on the subject of UNC-Chapel Hill's virology program, and the deeply troubling evidence that it played a central role in creating the SARS-CoV-2 virus that killed over 20 million people globally.

Yes, you read that right. And no, it's not hyperbole.

This isn't just speculation. Thanks to court-ordered documents pried loose by the nonprofit watchdog US Right to Know, we now know that Ralph Baric's lab at UNC:

• Engineered novel SARS-related coronaviruses in partnership with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
• Created these viruses with enhanced pandemic potential — on purpose.
• Proposed misleading the U.S. government about where the research would be conducted — claiming Chapel Hill, but planning Wuhan.
• Delivered both the blueprint and the lab-grown mice with humanized lungs needed to bring these viruses to life.

And all this happened not in secretive foreign biolabs — but right here in North Carolina.

There's a new Covid variant "surging through" Asia, according to this headline. It has already spread to the US and Europe as well, according to this article.

I'm guessing the word "surging" was in the circulated memo, because it appears in almost every article about this.

All of which makes me ask...


This might seem like a non sequitur, but I'm going somewhere.

Did you know that Disney's cynical monetization of nostalgia has seen them so aggressively work through their back catalogue of animated classics they are now releasing a live action remake of Moana, a film that's less than ten years old, and which had an animated sequel released only last year?

Have you tried following the MCU lately? What was once a massive project of coordinated story telling, a broad church working on a shared agenda to a singular end point, has now collapsed into a shapeless, pointless exercise in repetitive re-invention, insincere self-mockery and hopelessly clumsy political messaging.

Are you seeing what I'm saying here?

Last night the news broke that former President Joe Biden has been diagnosed with stage 4 prostate cancer, which has already metastasized to his bones.

The conversation has gone in two predictable directions.

On the one hand you have the predictable "out pouring of support" from fans of Team Blue, "liberal" journalists and celebrities.

On the other hand you have cynical commentary from Team Red, questioning the timing of the announcement and wondering how someone with such a high profile and (presumably) first class medical care could have cancer missed until such a late stage.

A third, quieter, option is to suggest a connection between this cancer and the Covid "vaccine". (A possibility I reject out of hand, becasue I don't believe there is any chance at all he was really given the experimental shot.)

But all of these conversations miss the point.

The question is not "what caused Biden's cancer?" or "why did they cover up Biden's cancer?" it's "why are they telling us Biden has cancer?"

Singapore's descent into medical tyranny

In a shocking move that tramples on fundamental human rights, Singapore has amended its Infectious Diseases Act (IDA) to force medical procedures on its citizens under threat of imprisonment. The amendments, enacted in 2023 and 2024, grant the Director-General of Health unchecked power to mandate vaccines — even in the absence of an active outbreak — while stripping citizens of legal protections against government overreach.

Under Sections 47, 65, and 67 of the IDA, Singaporeans who refuse government-ordered vaccinations can be fined up to 10,000 (SGD) or jailed for six months for a first "offense."

Repeat offenders face double the penalties, with fines up to 20,000 and a year behind bars. Worse yet, Section 67 absolves government officials of all liability, meaning citizens harmed by forced medical interventions have no legal recourse.

A direct assault on medical freedom and informed consent

The amendments represent a blatant violation of the Nuremberg Code, which established the principle of voluntary, informed consent after the atrocities of Nazi medical experiments. The Singaporean government now wields the power to force medical treatments on its people without accountability, echoing the darkest chapters of medical tyranny.

Dr. Smith, a vocal critic of forced vaccination policies, condemned the law: "Current disparate treatment runs rife across this nation, spreading like wildfire. It demands in exchange for job security and participation in society the injection of medical treatments that lack both FDA approval and legal recourse when damaging side effects occur. This is draconian at best and criminal at worst."

Singapore's People's Power Party (PPP) has also raised alarms. PPP politician Derrick Sim, a biotechnology and vaccine manufacturing expert, slammed the law in an April 14 Facebook post: "Section 47, 65, and 67 of the Infectious Disease Act were amended and in effect since 2023. If you choose not to go for vaccination during the next pandemic, you will be deemed to commit an offense. You will be criminalized. The penalty for first-time offense is 6 months imprisonment or up to $10,000 fine, or both. Do you support this ridiculous law?"

On August 16, 1951, the quiet town of Pont-Saint-Esprit in southern France was struck by a bizarre outbreak. Residents suddenly experienced severe symptoms: nausea, insomnia, and vivid hallucinations.

People reported seeing terrifying visions — snakes crawling out of their stomachs, fire engulfing their bodies, or blood dripping from the walls of their homes. Some cases were extreme: an 11-year-old boy attempted to strangle his grandmother, a man jumped from a window claiming he was an airplane, and others were restrained in straitjackets or chained to their beds.

By the end, at least 5 people died (some sources say 7), dozens were institutionalized, and over 300 were affected.

I remember as a 13-year-old kid reading about this in some magazine (I recall it was LIFE, but I could never find it since). For some reason, it terrified me and lived with me in my memory for 50-plus years. Recently, one of my readers turned me on to the story, and much has been written about it rather recently by other researchers.

As I remember the story, the outbreak was linked to bread from a bakery run by a local baker. Doctors and investigators concluded that the rye flour used in the bread was contaminated with ergot (claviceps purpurea), a fungus known historically for causing ergotism, or "St. Anthony's Fire." Ergot contains alkaloids similar to LSD, which could explain the hallucinations. This explanation was published in the British Medical Journal shortly after the event and became the prevailing theory for decades.

However, in 2009, Hank P. Albarelli Jr. reignited interest in the case with his book, A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA's Secret Cold War Experiments, claiming the incident was not a natural occurrence but a deliberate CIA experiment. While researching the death of Frank Olson — a CIA biochemist who died in 1953 under suspicious circumstances after working on LSD-related projects — Albarelli uncovered documents suggesting the agency had spiked the town's food with LSD as part of its Cold War mind-control program, MKULTRA (or its precursor, Project SPAN).

One key piece of evidence was a CIA memo labelled "Re: Pont-Saint-Esprit and F. Olson Files. SO Span/France Operation file, inclusive Olson. Intel files. Hand carry to Belin - tell him to see to it that these are buried," which implied a cover-up. Another document reportedly transcribed a conversation between a CIA agent and a Sandoz Pharmaceutical official (Sandoz being the Swiss company that first synthesized LSD), where the official hinted that the outbreak was caused by diethylamide (the "D" in LSD), not ergot.

Albarelli argued that the CIA, in collaboration with the U.S. Army's Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick, might have sprayed LSD into the air or contaminated local food to test its potential as a weapon for behavioural control. This theory aligns with known CIA activities during the 1950s, when the agency conducted numerous LSD experiments on unwitting subjects, including American servicemen and civilians.

Wouldn't it figure, eh?