Proof that the CDC, FDA, and NIH are corrupt and/or incompetent

substack.com ^ | 12/22/2021 | Steve Kirsch

[ransomnote]

An article for those people who are not already convinced of this (you know, like every member of Congress and the mainstream media). My regular followers will find nothing new or surprising here.

I wanted to start a placeholder article of examples of corruption and/or incompetence at our favorite 3-letter agencies. The lists will likely grow much longer over time.

Sadly, AFAIK, nobody in Congress is interested in looking at this. They all would rather look the other way and pretend there is no problem here. They refuse to discuss any of these points.

Feel free to suggest your favorite examples in the comments and I’ll incorporate into the main text. These are just to get you started. Hyperlinks will be added shortly.

FDA

1. Janet Woodcock, interim head of the FDA, promised to look into the Maddie de Garay paralysis (12-year old paralyzed in Pfizer 12-15 year old trial). Nothing happened.

2. We tried to get Steven A. Anderson, the top FDA official in charge of safety monitoring for the vaccines, to meet with any of my team members to go over the safety signals in VAERS. Dr. Anderson ignored all attempts.

3. The FDA claimed my VAERS death analysis was incorrect but could cite no specific error in the methodology or the data (since it used the CDC methodology it would be hard and they supplied the data). They won’t talk on the record about it.

4. The FDA rejected our Fluvoxamine EUA saying we lacked enough data. Funny how the workers at Golden Gates Fields racetrack could plainly see the drug worked and most of them lack a college education. Maybe the FDA should hire them instead? The FDA couldn’t cite a confounder or bias that could possibly change the result. If they aren’t corrupt, they are incompetent. This cost thousands of lives and we wasted a year to complete a clinical trial to prove we were right. Obvious to normal people. Not obvious to the experts at the FDA.

5. The FDA has claimed we are spreading misinformation, yet refuses to provide anyone to have a recorded discussion with us to set us on the right path.

6. They approved that Alzheimer’s drug that was so bad they stopped the clinical trials.

7. I’m sure the FDA will soon approve molnupiravir despite the fact that the clinical trial showed it didn’t work. How can they approve molnupiravir but reject fluvoxamine (which is now on the John Hopkins practice guidelines and will soon be on many others). Intentionally introducing mutations into viral RNA might create a more dangerous version of SARS-CoV-2, critics say. But most damaging was that “in the second group, there was almost no difference in outcome for those on the antiviral compared with those on the placebo.” See this Nature article on molnupiravir for more details.

8. You gotta love the horse picture for ivermectin and making it look like ivermectin isn’t safe. Gotta admire the creativity here.

9. Threatening to take NAC off the market after 60 years with no safety problems and making it available prescription only. Are you kidding me? They are taking a super safe supplement and making it prescription only while pushing a deadly vaccine and that’s available without a prescription. If that isn’t corruption, I don’t know what is. They only did this after it was discovered NAC treats COVID and makes it relatively harmless.

CDC

1. They are supposed to evaluate the childhood vaccine safety schedule every 2 years. They didn’t do this. Even after they lost in court.

2. They claim nobody has died from the COVID mRNA vaccines. Seriously? Then how can they explain Peter Schirmacher’s study which was confirmed by other German pathologists.

3. They claim that masks work citing a poorly done study and ignoring the only two randomized trials, both of which showed masks make no difference whatsoever.

4. The CDC experts cannot find a safety signal in VAERS to save their lives. They admitted it was the DoD that found the myocarditis safety signal for the vaccine. They’ve ignored the other 9,000 elevated symptoms caused by the COVID vaccines. How about death? Cardiac arrest? Intracranial hemorrhage? Pulmonary embolism? Paralysis? Menstrual problems?

5. Refuse to compute VAERS URF for these vaccines. They won’t reveal the URF to anyone. They pretend URF=1 in their presentation even though they know for sure this is false.

6. Cannot explain with evidence the elevation in death count in VAERS this year.

7. Refuse to debate us.

8. Never did a risk benefit calculation of the vaccines showing the “society benefit.” How many excess lives do you save per year by getting vaccinated and where is the proof of that?

9. Toby Rogers’ risk benefit analysis for ages 5 to 11 show the vaccines kill 117 kids for every life saved. Where is the equivalent risk-benefit analysis from the CDC? Where’s Dr. Roger’s mistake? Nobody could find it.

10. Continue to misrepresent the myocarditis risk. I know a doctor with 1,200 patients who has 5 myocarditis cases in men and women 30 to 50 years old after vaccination. If myocarditis is as rare as the CDC claims, how do they explain this? This isn’t cherry picked data. These rates align with the rates in VAERS once you apply a reasonable URF (more than 41) to the reports.

11. What happened at Simpsonwood.

12. The CDC says “Unvaccinated people are 14 times more likely to die of COVID-19 than those who get the shot.” But wait a second. Pfizer’s own randomized controlled trial (Phase 3 6 month report) showed it was only a 2X death benefit, not 14X. So we aren’t supposed to believe the randomized trial from Pfizer?!?!

13. Tells people on their website that the spike protein is harmless which is not what the medical journal papers say.

14. We had some people in the CDC willing to talk, but as of December 2021, they are scared to speak out. CDC has done a fantastic job of intimidation!

NIH

1. Fluvoxamine was proven in Phase 2 trials (Lenze study published in JAMA) and then a real-world trial at Golden Gate Fields (Seftel trial). It is impossible to explain the outcomes if the drug didn’t work. I offered anyone $1M for a bias or confounder that could explain the result if the drug didn’t work. No takers. The precautionay principle of says they should have recommended it.

2. Even after fluvoxamine passed the Phase 3 Together trial showing a 12X reduction in death, the NIH refused to adjust their recommendation. Johns Hopkins however defied the NIH and added fluvoxamine to their treatment guidelines. Someone isn’t telling the truth and it isn’t Johns Hopkins. I tried to get the top fluvoxamine researchers to comment publicly on the NIH’s recommendation and they refused. That tells you all you need to know, doesn’t it?

3. Refused to fund any early treatment studies. They wouldn’t even fund the fluvoxamine phase 3 trial after the phase 2 trial was 100% success. There is something seriously corrupt here.

4. Any Democratic committee chairman can request Fauci’s unredacted emails. If the NIH were truly acting in the public interest, they would urge Congress to do that to show the corruption. Those emails are guaranteed to show the corruption but the Democrats REFUSE to request them.

5. The NIH nixed ivermectin as well. But ivermectin has multiple published meta-analysis and systematic reviews for use with COVID. Precautionary principle requires the NIH to recommend ivermectin unless they have proof the risks outweigh the benefits. They don’t.

6. Fareed and Tyson reached out to the NIH in March 2020 to tell them about their amazing early treatment protocol which was keeping everyone out of the hospital. The NIH ignored them. Today, they’ve now treated 7,000 patients, have had only 4 hospitalizations (people who got there late), and no deaths for anyone who got treated early. NIH still ignores them. This is impossible to explain if the treatment protocol didn’t work. But the NIH won’t even return their calls.

[ransomnote]

PING

[Red Badger]

FIRST THEY WERE CORRUPTED, THEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT..............

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[linMcHlp]

bttt

[Glad2bnuts]

Yeomans work ransomnote, and again I thank you.

[DiogenesLamp]

Proof that the CDC, FDA, and NIH are corrupt and/or incompetent

People connected to big Pharma (New York. New Jersey. Massachusetts) are all making big bucks off of this vaccine nonsense.

But it is a grave mistake to believe the corruption is only in the CDC, the FDC and the NIH. The corruption runs through and through the government, and it has been this way since around the 1820s in Washington DC.

And though it existed before Abraham Lincoln got there, Abraham Lincoln ramped up the corruption into overdrive.

People don't realize that his true legacy is handing power to the corruption/collusion system between big government and big industry. A condition we now know as "fascism."

[SoConPubbie]

Ping!

[Taxman]

Ping

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: " it has been this way since around the 1820s in Washington DC.
And though it existed before Abraham Lincoln got there, Abraham Lincoln ramped up the corruption into overdrive."

It's important to remember that one reason Republicans got elected in 1860 was "Democratics" notorious corruption, as the Republican 1860 platform put it:

"6. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the Federal Government; that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans; while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the Federal metropolis, show that an entire change of administration is imperatively demanded."

So the election of 1860 was not only about slavery, but also about "Democratics" "measureless subserviency" to globalized big business interests -- i.e., cotton, tobacco, sugar, etc. During the 1850s Democratic administrations reduced tariffs to their lowest rates since the War of 1812 and doubled the national debt.
Republicans promised to correct that, and voters liked what they heard.

Now, claims that historically Republicans were, on the whole, either more or less corrupt than Democrats are simply not supported by any metric I know of, except one: the Democrat news media typically complains loudly about alleged Republican corruption, while remaining silent about often much worse Democratic corruption.

And since DiogenesLamp is, at heart, a true Democrat he believes all the bad said about Republicans, while discounting anything bad reported on his own "Democratics."

[DiogenesLamp]

Liberals always say they are for the greater good and the common folk, but they lie. As soon as Lincoln's team got into power, they started exploiting the system to enrich themselves.

Dupont made all their gunpowder by the way. I just learned that the other day.

[x]

Diogenes seems like he’s read too much Gore Vidal, but Vidal was cynical about American politics all the way back to the beginning and cynical about everything else too, not just Lincoln.

[DiogenesLamp]

Cynicism is the appropriate response to virtually anything the Government tells you, and this is likely true going back to the start.

Remember, the Articles of Confederation were supposed to be the governing charter, and then they decide to hold another convention in secret that even broke the rules of the Articles of Confederation.

And of course Diogenes was the father of Cynicism.

[x]

Vidal said something like that, too.

But a thoroughgoing cynicism about everything is another social disease that in the end prevents people from doing anything about corruption. If everybody was always in it for themselves, then you can't blame anybody for being in it for themselves now. Society may present its founders in a glowing light, but that's because it gives us something to aspire to and to live up to now. Without that, we'd be worse, not better.

[SoCal Pubbie]

When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Watch out Dim, you might smash your thumb.

[jeffersondem]

“Republicans promised to correct that, and voters liked what they heard.”

Well, 39 percent anyway.

[BroJoeK]

"Well, 39 percent anyway."

I'd say 40% of the popular vote, Douglas got 30%, Breckenridge 18%.

Lincoln won 55% of the 33 states and 59% of 303 electoral votes.

So, constitutionally speaking, the 1860 election wasn't even close.

[DiogenesLamp]

But a thoroughgoing cynicism about everything is another social disease that in the end prevents people from doing anything about corruption.

Being cynical does not mean you are unwilling to take action. I think Jefferson had exactly the right idea.

“In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.” ― Thomas Jefferson

The problem is, Judicial activism has allowed people to misrepresent the meaning of written words, and it is the corrupt usage of loopholes such as this that are causing much of our modern troubles.

Abolishing slavery in Massachusetts is an admirable goal, but lying about the intent of legislatures is an avenue for tyranny.

The proper way to change laws is to change them through the accepted practice, not to get a judge or a jury to pretend they mean something very different from what was intended when those words were written.

[DiogenesLamp]

When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Watch out Dim, you might smash your thumb.

I am reminded of people pointing out that in 2016, all the Democrats/Liberals believed the election had been stolen from Hitlery through Russian influence, or Ukrainian influence or some other diabolical method.

But for 2020, we have this exact same group of people denying any sort of corruption or election rigging could have occurred in 2020 and that it was the most honest and fair election this nation has ever had.

And in a like manner, I have been pinging you and others to stories showing examples of government/industry collusion/corruption and examples of other freepers believing there is a shadow government "deep state" running things behind the scenes.

Now I assume you are all willing to believe that such private/public collusion occurs on other issues, but the one thing you will not accept is that any taint of corruption was involved in the US side of the Civil War.

Everything else may be corrupt, but this era of 1860-1865 was absolutely saintly and without blemish.

In this manner do you resemble liberals who refuse to see anything wrong with the election rigging of 2020.

I think my point here is that when you keep seeing a lot of nails, the proper tool to use is a hammer.

[DiogenesLamp]

It would have been Seward but for the corrupt primary rigging Lincoln and his corporate railroad cohorts engaged in.

When you start to look at Lincoln from the perspective of corruption, a lot of information starts to jump out at you.

Railway act of 1862? Big government project benefiting connected industry?

And who were the "Graingers"? Why did they need to be formed?