The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Subscribe to the Institute View Us on YouTube Follow Us On Twitter Join Us on Facebook Join Us at Google Plus

Search Results

for:

Daniel Horowitz

Now that vaccinated people need the monoclonal treatments, Biden admin and media attack the treatment

undefined

For those of you who couldn't believe that the government's war on ivermectin and every other treatment was rooted in a sinister motivation, its new attack on the monoclonal antibodies should indelibly cement the terrifying thought in your mind. The government and the media are now using the same attack pattern on the monoclonal antibody treatment that they used on hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin now that it has become popular with people desperate for treatment – vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.

On Sept. 14, the Biden administration announced that the feds would be cutting the number of monoclonal treatments per week in the southern states and reallocating them as part of a broader plan to start rationing the treatments. For example, in Florida, HHS issued an allocation for the week of Sept. 13 of 3,100 doses of BAM/ETE treatments and 27,850 doses of REGN-COV. As Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said in a press conference last week, this would effectively reduce Florida's allocation by 50%. The federal agency did this without any warning or indication that there was a shortage.

Then, last Thursday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki explained the move as follows: "Our supply is not unlimited and we believe it should be equitable." HHS then followed up with an explanation of the policy of "equity."
read on...

15 Studies That Indicate Natural Immunity From Prior Infection is More Robust Than the COVID Vaccines

undefined

It's the 800-pound gorilla in the pandemic. The debate over forced vaccination with an ever-waning vaccine is cresting right around the time when the debate should be moot for a lot of people. Among the most fraudulent messages of the CDC's campaign of deceit is to force the vaccine on those with prior infection, who have a greater degree of protection against all versions of the virus than those with any of the vaccines. It's time to set the record straight once and for all that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is broader, more durable, and longer-lasting than any of the shots on the market today. Our policies must reflect that reality.

It should be noted that this exercise is not even necessary now that our own government concedes that immunity from the vaccines, particularly the Pfizer shot, wanes each month. With the Mayo Clinic researchers suggesting, based on old data that likely got even worse since, that Pfizer's efficacy against infection is only 42%, there is no reason to even attempt to compare this degree of immunity to the near-perfect immunity of prior infection, even against Delta. It should be obvious to any intellectually honest person that an unvaccinated individual with prior infection is exponentially safer to be around than someone who had the vaccines but not prior infection.

Remember, a significant portion of the population already got infected, and when the latest Delta wave is over in the South, the region will likely reach clear supermajorities of the population with immunity, as was found in India following the circulation of this very contagious strain of the virus.
read on...

FDA disseminates dangerous and libelous misinformation against lifesaving COVID treatment

undefined

Does our government believe Africans are not human beings?

On Sunday, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy declared, "We've been seeing health misinformation as a problem for years, but the speed, scale and sophistication with which it is spreading and impacting our health is really unprecedented."

Perhaps the surgeon general should look in the mirror and lecture the FDA for dissuading people from taking lifesaving ivermectin. Over the weekend, the FDA tweeted out a message warning that ivermectin is for horses and cows, not people, implying that it is dangerous to consume and is not approved for humans.

Evidently, officials believe that millions of human beings in Africa (not to mention thousands in the Western world) are no better than animals.

Ivermectin has been dispensed 3.7 billion times in African countries since 1987 and is regarded as one of the greatest cures of all time for a disease ailing human beings. Here are the facts.
read on...

Retraction serves as the new academic censorship

undefined

It's become a living parody. Every time there is a study or World Health Organization guidance that raises concerns or counters the narrative of COVID fascism, it is retracted and changed the minute it is cited by panic skeptics. We all joked on the day that a German study raising concerns about CO2 levels in children wearing masks was published in JAMA that the editors must have had the day off. Well, to our surprise, it did take 16 days for them to retract it, which means they really had trouble finding anything wrong with it.

The results of the German study could not be allowed to stand because rather than just attack the efficacy of masks, it raised questions about serious side effects. In a randomized controlled trial of 45 children wearing masks, the researchers found that CO2 levels increased to levels deemed unacceptable by the German Federal Environmental Office by a factor of 6 after just three minutes.

On July 16, the two editors of JAMA issued a retraction with a one-paragraph explanation. "Following publication, numerous scientific issues were raised regarding the study methodology, including concerns about the applicability of the device used for assessment of carbon dioxide levels in this study setting, and whether the measurements obtained accurately represented carbon dioxide content in inhaled air, as well as issues related to the validity of the study conclusions," wrote editors Dimitri Christakis and Phil B. Fontanarosa.

They never divulge who raised those issues or extrapolated on the details of their concerns. They claim that in their response to the criticism, "the authors did not provide sufficiently convincing evidence to resolve these issues, as determined by editorial evaluation and additional scientific review.
read on...

Study shows remdesivir as primary COVID treatment is a total bust

undefined

Sixteen months into this virus, our government has nothing to offer us in terms of treatment in the hospital but remdesivir at $3,100 a dose and zero treatment options at the critical early stage, when serious complications can be pre-empted. Now, a new study from the University of Iowa shows what we knew all along – that remdesivir failed to reduce mortality one iota. Why are we to believe the same government entities about embracing the clot shots and shunning so many other cheaper and effective treatments after spending billions and losing countless lives on a failed drug?

After 62 studies, 32 of them randomized controlled trials, establishing ivermectin as an effective treatment and an even more effective preventative to keep people out of the hospital in the first place, our government refuses to endorse its use and Big Tech continues to censor it. They claim they need more studies. Yet not a single randomized controlled trial showed remdesivir to be effective before they dove in headfirst and the NIH made it the only approved antiviral treatment for COVID. Now, a University of Iowa study published in JAMA Network Open on Thursday has shown that remdesivir was a complete bust.

Among the 2,334 US veterans studied in 124 hospitals, a higher share of remdesivir patients (12.2 percent) who took part in the study died than patients in the control group (10.6 percent). Moreover, on average, remdesivir patients spent six days in the hospital, while control group patients spent only three.

read on...

The Medical Field's Immoral War on Children

undefined

Wanted: a pediatrician who actually believes in science and not child abuse.

My children are months overdue for their checkups because they are distraught about having to wear masks. The baby, who doesn't yet have to cover her breathing orifices, was traumatized at her recent visit by seeing everyone dressed like a mummy. How can it be that the doctors responsible most for the health of children can't read simple data and studies showing clearly that children are more at risk from the trauma of the response to COVID than from the virus?

Scientists from University College London and the Universities of York, Bristol, and Liverpool studied the data from all pediatric COVID-19 infections in the U.K. and found that just 25 children under 18 likely died from the virus in a country with over 12 million children. Only six of those children had no known serious underlying conditions, although the authors caution that they could not confirm that all of them were indeed healthy. The rest of the fatalities were among those with the sorts of conditions that cause people to die every year from other endemic respiratory viruses for which we never disrupt society or force masking and experimental injections.

"During the same time period studied there were 124 deaths from suicide and 268 deaths from trauma, emphasizing COVID-19 is rarely fatal in CYP," concluded the U.K. scientists.
read on...

New study shows mask-wearing children at risk for ‘unacceptable’ CO2 levels, cautions against the practice

undefined

We've spent over a year debating nonexistent evidence that masks effectively protect against the spread of viruses. However, there has been little debate and few published studies on potential harms of mask-wearing, a reality that has allowed zealous maskers to aggressively push their mandate as harmless, with no downside. Well, now we have a randomized controlled trial published in JAMA that raises serious concerns about this practice.

Researchers from Germany conducted a blinded randomized controlled trial of 45 children wearing masks and measured the baseline carbon dioxide levels during inhalation and exhalation behind various masks as compared to the levels of unmasked children. The results are very concerning:
We measured means (SDs) between 13 120 (384) and 13 910 (374) ppm of carbon dioxide in inhaled air under surgical and filtering facepiece 2 (FFP2) masks, which is higher than what is already deemed unacceptable by the German Federal Environmental Office by a factor of 6. This was a value reached after 3 minutes of measurement. Children under normal conditions in schools wear such masks for a mean of 270 (interquartile range, 120-390) minutes. The Figure shows that the value of the child with the lowest carbon dioxide level was 3-fold greater than the limit of 0.2 % by volume. The youngest children had the highest values, with one 7-year-old child's carbon dioxide level measured at 25 000 ppm.
Why has nobody in our government bothered to study this before experimenting on children for a virus that doesn't affect them?
read on...

A group of Florida parents cultured their children’s masks and found dangerous bacteria

undefined

The idea of children, including preschoolers, walking around with bacteria traps on their breathing orifices all day so shocked the conscience that last summer, a bunch of internet parodies were produced illustrating such absurdity. Then, within weeks, most local governments mandated this cruel form of child abuse for an entire year without any study of the side effects. Now a group of parents from the Gainesville, Florida, area have shown that such masks are traps for harmful bacteria that potentially make children much sicker than from COVID — the virus for which the masks were required, but failed to mitigate.

In a press release obtained by TheBlaze and posted at RationalGround.com, six Alachua County, Florida, parents reported the findings of the lab cultures of their children's masks worn in school. The parents sent the six masks to the University of Florida's Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center after they were worn for five to eight hours, most during in-person schooling by children ages 6 through 11. Although many students across the country likely wore dirty masks indefinitely for numerous days, the face masks studied in this analysis were new or freshly laundered before wearing. One of the masks submitted was from an adult who wore it at work as a cosmetologist.

The resulting report found that five masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.
read on...

Florida appeals court rules mask mandate is unconstitutional

undefined

In April, I wrote a column outlining the constitutional violations of mask mandates and asking why the courts have failed to abide by the line of Supreme Court cases protecting the right to bodily integrity. Well, on Friday a Florida appeals court did exactly that, perhaps in more emphatic language than a Kentucky judge last week.

Although Florida has been largely free of state-based COVID restrictions and never had a mask mandate, several counties, such as Alachua, zealously instituted unconstitutional regulations until fairly recently. In a landmark ruling on Friday, Florida's First District Court of Appeals ruled that a lower court had erred in tossing out the lawsuit against Alachua County's mask mandate because it should be held as presumptively unconstitutional.

"Based on what the supreme court has told us about the scope of article I, section 23, Green (and anyone else in Alachua County) reasonably could expect autonomy over his body, including his face, which means that he was correct to claim an entitlement to be let alone and free from intrusion by Alachua County's commission chairman," Judge Adam Scott Tanenbaum, an appointee of Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), wrote. "The mask mandate, then, implicated the right of privacy. According to Gainesville Woman Care, the mask mandate was presumptively unconstitutional as a result."
read on...


Authors

Tags