Guest post by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.

“Many, many thousands” of COVID-19 patients died because they were put on ventilators and denied treatment with ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine or even vitamin D, respiratory therapist Mark Bishofsky told CHD.TV.

Thousands of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 died because of a rush to put people on ventilators — while denying them medications like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and vitamin D, according to respiratory therapist Mark Bishofsky.

A respiratory therapist is a healthcare provider who helps diagnose, treat and manage conditions that affect the lungs, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

They are the clinicians who perform intubation — inserting a tube through a person’s mouth or nose, then down into their airway — so the patient can receive oxygen from a ventilator machine.

In a recent episode of “Good Morning CHD,” Bishofsky said he witnessed hospital staff opting to prematurely intubate many COVID-19 patients.

He said:

“Many, many thousands of patients died because of this rush to early intubation and not allowing early treatment with medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine or even vitamin D — they wouldn’t even give these patients vitamin D. They just wanted to intubate them and put them on remdesivir.”

This article originally appeared on The Defender and was republished with permission.

Guest post by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.

“Many, many thousands” of COVID-19 patients died because they were put on ventilators and denied treatment with ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine or even vitamin D, respiratory therapist Mark Bishofsky told CHD.TV.

Thousands of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 died because of a rush to put people on ventilators — while denying them medications like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and vitamin D, according to respiratory therapist Mark Bishofsky.

A respiratory therapist is a healthcare provider who helps diagnose, treat and manage conditions that affect the lungs, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

They are the clinicians who perform intubation — inserting a tube through a person’s mouth or nose, then down into their airway — so the patient can receive oxygen from a ventilator machine.

In a recent episode of “Good Morning CHD,” Bishofsky said he witnessed hospital staff opting to prematurely intubate many COVID-19 patients.

He said:

“Many, many thousands of patients died because of this rush to early intubation and not allowing early treatment with medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine or even vitamin D — they wouldn’t even give these patients vitamin D. They just wanted to intubate them and put them on remdesivir.”

Patients were being intubated “when they were needing as little as three liters of oxygen,” according to Bishofsky, who said he’d never seen that before in his 25 years of practice.

“That’s so little oxygen to the point where if you took the patient off of it, they’re gonna be fine,” he said. “But there was this rush to intubate these patients.”

‘Intubation should be a last resort’

Bishofsky tried to convince doctors that “this wasn’t the right thing to do.” He explained:

“When I started my career in 1999 I went to … a huge symposium talking about the risks of intubation — the risks of using a ventilator — and even back then it was known that intubation should be a last resort.

“At that time, they were reporting a 25% increase in mortality of patients that were getting intubated and put on a ventilator. And now we know during COVID it was upwards of 80 to 85% of people that were on ventilators passed away.”

Ventilators are “one of the most important life-saving tools we have,” Bishofsky said, but they are also “extremely dangerous” because they typically cause bacterial pneumonia.

Doctors told Bishofsky it was simply the hospital’s protocol. “They didn’t really have an explanation. … They were spewing mainstream media talking points.”

Bishofsky — who ended up resigning when the COVID-19 vaccine mandates came out — said early on he tried convincing doctors to give hydroxychloroquine.

In the first week of the pandemic, the doctors at Bishofsky’s hospital used hydroxychloroquine. “We had extremely good outcomes,” he said. But then an “absolutely bogus” study came out in The Lancet on hydroxychloroquine. “The doctors would cite that.”

At the end of his tenure at the hospital, Bishofsky told its medical director, “You know, this whole early intubation thing was completely hideous.” The medical director admitted it was hideous but said, “We were doing the best we could.”

In Bishofsky’s view, many of the medical staff were “mind-controlled” and weren’t fully conscious of the harm they were doing.

“I think a lot of healthcare workers are getting a bad rap,” he said. “Most, if not all, the nurses that I worked with, they wanted to help, and I think they were doing the best they could.”

“But again, under mind control — most of them submitted to the jab — they wouldn’t listen.”

‘I held the hands of too many patients as they took their last breath’

One of the saddest aspects of the hospital protocol was how COVID-19 patients were isolated from their family members.

“These patients wanted to see family more than anything,” he said. “Perhaps they’d been there two or three weeks. They’re afraid. They’re sick. They just want to see somebody they love.”

For a while, the hospital allowed COVID-19 patients to receive a visit from a family member only if the patient agreed to be put on “comfort care.”

“Once you’re put on comfort care,” he said, “life-saving measures are slowly withdrawn and the patient dies within minutes to hours — and these patients were submitting to this … a lot of these patients I know would have survived, but they wanted so badly to see a family member that they would submit to kind of being euthanized.”

In other cases, COVID-19 patients died alone without family at their bedside.

“I held the hands of too many patients as they took their last breath because family couldn’t be there,” Bishofsky said.

Watch here:

The post Rush to Use Ventilators Killed Thousands of COVID Patients appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

Guest post by Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.

A federal judge rejected the EPA’s argument that the exact level at which fluoride is hazardous is too unclear to determine if the chemical presents an unreasonable risk, and ruled the agency must take regulatory action.

In a decision that could end the practice of water fluoridation in the U.S., a federal judge late Tuesday ruled that water fluoridation at current U.S. levels poses an “unreasonable risk” of reduced IQ in children.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can no longer ignore that risk, and must take regulatory action, Judge Edward Chen of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California wrote in the long-awaited landmark decision.

More than 200 million Americans drink water treated with fluoride at the “optimal” level of 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L). However, Chen ruled that a preponderance of scientific evidence shows this level of fluoride exposure may damage human health, particularly that of pregnant mothers and young children.

The verdict delivers a major blow to the EPA, public health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and professional lobbying groups like the American Dental Association (ADA), which have staked their reputations on the claim that water fluoridation is one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century and an unqualified public good.

Fluoride proponents refused to reexamine that stance despite mounting scientific evidence from top researchers and government agencies of fluoride’s neurotoxic risks, particularly for infants’ developing brains.

Instead, they attempted to weaken and suppress the research and discredit the scientists carrying it out.

Rick North, board member of Fluoride Action Network, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, told The Defender, “What’s false is the CDC claiming that fluoridation is one of the 10 greatest health achievements of the 20th century. What’s true is that ending fluoridation will be one of the 10 greatest health achievements of the 21st century.”

“The judge did what EPA has long refused to do, and that is to apply the EPA standard risk assessment framework to fluoride,” said Michael Connett, attorney for the plaintiffs. “In so doing, the court has shown that the widespread exposure to fluoride that we now have in the United States is unreasonably and precariously close to the levels that we know cause harm.”

The EPA can appeal Tuesday’s decision. The agency told The Defender it is reviewing the decision and has no comment at this time. The U.S. Department of Justice, which represents the EPA in the lawsuit, also said it has no comment.

https://vigilantnews.com/post/shocking-u-s-government-report-concludes-fluoride-lowers-iq-in-children/embed/#?secret=GoADC4XTVt#?secret=FdFebryzd8

EPA’s argument ‘not persuasive’

The ruling concludes a historic lawsuit — one that has dragged on for seven years — brought against the EPA by environmental and consumer advocacy organizations like the Fluoride Action Network, Moms Against Fluoridation and Food & Water Watch, along with individual parents and children.

It is the first lawsuit to go to a federal trial under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended by Congress in 2016. The TSCA allows U.S. citizens to petition the EPA to evaluate whether a chemical presents an unreasonable risk to public health and should be regulated.

If the EPA denies a TSCA citizen petition — which the agency did when the plaintiffs asked it to reexamine water fluoridation in 2016 — the petitioners are entitled to a “de novo” judicial review of the science without the deference to the agency typically afforded it in legal cases.

Chen’s 80-page ruling, issued six months after closing arguments in February, offers a careful and detailed articulation of the EPA’s review process for chemicals that pose a hazard to human health and evaluates and summarizes the extensive scientific data presented at trial.

Chen wrote, “EPA’s own expert agrees that fluoride is hazardous at some level.” He cited a key report issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) National Toxicology Program (NTP), which undertook a systematic review of all available scientific research at the time of publication.

The report “concluded that fluoride is indeed associated with reduced IQ in children, at least at exposure levels at or above 1.5 mg/L,” Chen wrote.

The NTP also reported that although there are technical challenges to measuring fluoride’s toxic effects at low levels, “scientists have observed a statistically significant association between fluoride and adverse effects in children even at such ‘lower’ exposure levels,” Chen wrote.

He said that despite recognizing that fluoride is hazardous, the EPA’s defense rested largely on the fact that the exact level at which it is hazardous is too unclear for the agency to determine whether the chemical presents an unreasonable risk.

This argument is “not persuasive,” Chen wrote.

Pregnant women exposed to fluoride in water at levels exceeding the hazard level

The EPA requires a margin of error by a factor of at least 10 to exist between the hazard level for a toxin and the acceptable human exposure level. “Put differently, only an exposure that is below 1/10th of the hazard level would be deemed safe under Amended TSCA, given the margin of error required,” Chen wrote.

That means that even if the hazard level were 4 mg/L — well above the 1.5 mg/L identified by the NTP — the safe level of fluoride exposure would be 0.4 mg/L, well below the current “optimal” fluoride level in the U.S., Chen wrote.

The much lower probable hazard level established by high-quality studies indicates that many pregnant women in the U.S. are already exposed to fluoride in water at levels exceeding the hazard level.

“Under even the most conservative estimates of this level, there is not enough of a margin between the accepted hazard level and the actual human exposure levels to find that fluoride is safe,” Chen concluded.

“Simply put, the risk to health at exposure levels in United States drinking water is sufficiently high to trigger regulatory response by the EPA under Amended TSCA.”

The law dictates that the EPA must take regulatory action, but it does not specify what that action has to be. EPA regulatory actions can range from notifying the public of risks to banning chemicals.

Philippe Grandjean, M.D., Ph.D., adjunct professor in environmental health at Harvard and chair of environmental medicine at the University of Southern Denmark, top researcher on fluoride’s neurotoxicity and expert witness for plaintiffs in the case told The Defender he thought the court’s decision was “well-justified.”

He said the ruling made it incumbent on the EPA to go beyond simply ending water fluoridation.

“EPA will have to consider what to do in the southwestern parts of the country where the fluoride content of groundwater is too high due to minerals in the soil containing fluoride,” he said. “And then there is the question about ingestion of toothpaste.”

The CDC and the ADA did not immediately respond to The Defender’s request for comment.

More than 70 years of controversy

For more than seven decades, U.S. public health officials have steadfastly supported water fluoridation, claiming the practice is a key strategy for maintaining and improving dental health.

Proponents of water fluoridation, with help from the mainstream press, often attempted to cast those questioning fluoride’s benefits and raising concerns about its safety as conspiracy theorists.

The EPA in 1975 recommended adding fluoride to water at an optimal level of 1.2 mg/L for its dental benefits, but recommended a maximum level of 4 mg/L, the ruling said.

As more evidence has emerged about fluoride’s adverse health effects, including skeletal fluorosis, recommended levels were revised.

Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, officially lowered the recommended dosage for water fluoridation in 2015 from 0.7-1.2 mg/L to 0.7 mg/L after considering “adverse health effects” along with alleged benefits.

However, evidence that fluoride poses a neurotoxic risk has existed for decades.

In 2017, after the EPA rejected their citizen petition to end fluoridation of drinking water in the U.S. based on evidence of health risks, namely neurotoxicity, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit.

A seven-day trial took place in federal court in San Francisco in June 2020, but Chen put the proceedings on hold pending the release of the NTP’s systematic review of research available on the neurotoxic effects of fluoride.

The NTP sought to publish its report — which consisted of a “state of the science” monograph and a meta-analysis — in May 2022, but dental officials at the CDC and the National Institutes of Health National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research pressured HHS Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine to prevent the review from being published.

The ADA also sought to suppress the report.

Levine told the NTP to not publish the report but to put it on hold and allow for further review.

Plaintiffs submitted documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act exposing this intervention to the court. The revelation prompted Chen to rule that the trial should go forward using the draft report from the NTP.

The trial resumed in January in San Francisco, with arguments presented over the course of two weeks.

The NTP’s monograph was finalized and published last month on its website. The meta-analysis is forthcoming in a peer-reviewed journal.

Connett said that Congress created the citizen petition provision in TSCA as a counterweight to bureaucratic lethargy and as a check on the EPA.

The statute, he said, is a powerful tool for overcoming politicized science.

“When science becomes fossilized in political inertia, the citizen petition provision of TSCA is a very powerful tool for citizens,” Connett said. “Through this case, we have been able to, I think we’ve been able to effectuate what Congress had envisioned with this part of the statute.”

Donate to Children’s Health Defense

The post VICTORY! Fluoride in Water Poses “Unreasonable Risk” to Children, Federal Judge Rules appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

“There’s no such thing as Republican children or Democratic children. Over the 20,000 generations of human beings that have lived on this planet before us, the primary biological drive and spiritual drive has been to make sure that the kids were safe. It’s extraordinary today that these profit making corporations have used their capacity to control our government and to control the media to turn us all against that most fundamental biological drive…If a foreign nation did this to our country, we would consider it an act of war.”

This post originally appeared on Chief Nerd’s 𝕏 feed and was republished with permission.

Follow Chief Nerd on 𝕏

The post MUST WATCH: RFK Jr. Draws a Standing Ovation as He Calls to Make America Healthy Again appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

Guest post by Tyler Durden

The United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) has urged federal, state, and local authorities to investigate JBS SA’s meat processing plant in Greeley, Colorado, for alleged human trafficking violations involving Haitian migrants. Similar accusations have been made regarding human trafficking networks exploiting migrants at factories in Springfield, Ohio, and Charleroi, Pennsylvania.

UFCW Local 7 President Kim Cordova said these Haitians and other foreigners came into the country legally and were quickly exploited for cheap labor in a possible human migrant trafficking scheme. 

Here are more shocking revelations from the union:

Information gathered from UFCW Local 7 members who work at the JBS plant in Greeley, outlined in detail below, includes numerous cases of abusive practices both within and outside of the workplace, including management-led human trafficking utilizing the social media platform TikTok; charging immigrant workers for company-provided rent in squalor conditions, job applications, and transportation; threats and intimidation against workers and their families abroad; dangerously high production line speeds; and withholding mail including medical bills and important paperwork.

UFCW explained, “As many as 500 or more Haitian and Benin workers, who are in the country legally through work visas or asylum, may have been subject to potential crimes and workplace violations. “

“The company knew about these tactics – and in fact paid for workers to live in squalor conditions at a local motel – and turned a blind eye until they were questioned by the press,” said Cordova, adding, “One of the main individuals involved in this terrible treatment is still employed by JBS.”

The union explained that numerous hiring managers outside the company were involved in the scheme. In other words, staffing companies likely served as labor mules, trafficking these migrants from their homes, stuffed in like cattle, to factories in vans. 

JBS’ Greeley plant is located just an hour from the sanctuary city of Denver, run by far-left Democrats.  

In recent weeks, we informed readers that the story in Springfield, Ohio, and Charleroi, Pennsylvania, was not about claims about Haitians eating cats and dogs. Instead, about the numerous reports we received claiming labor mules (staffing companies) were exploiting Haitian migrants.

Here’s our reporting so far…

• Migrant Population In Charleroi, Pennsylvania Explodes 2,000% As Crisis Unfolds
• Watch: Resident Of PA Manufacturing Town Exposes Reality Of Haitian ‘Great Job Replacement’
• “Blow Your Mind”: Ex-WSJ Journo Uncovers Hub Of An Alleged Migrant Trafficking Network In Springfield, Ohio
• “He’s Taking My People”: Alleged Murder-For-Hire Plot In Charleroi Reveals Migrant Labor Mules
• “No Americans”: Insider Of Alleged Trafficking Network Reveals How Migrants Ended Up At Charleroi, PA Factory

There’s a very real possibility this alleged migrant trafficking network is happening nationwide. 

lleged migrant trafficking networks are becoming an inconvenient truth for Democrats and their globalist allies in the Biden administration, who imported the third world by the millions into the first world.

At the end of the day, the blue-collar worker is being replaced. 

This was only made possible by globalist open border policies pushed by the Biden-Harris team.  

When will the unions wake up to the fact that Biden-Harris’ open borders are their demise? Teamsters already did. 

The post Union Makes Shocking Claim: Colorado Meat Factory Involved in “Management-Led Human Trafficking” of Haitians appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

A case of measles in 2023, reported by the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and mainstream media as being the state’s first case in four years, was vaccine-induced, according to documents released Tuesday by Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN).

Kim Mack Rosenberg, general counsel for Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender that measles “outbreaks” are a well-worn tactic of state and federal governmental agencies to churn up fears about people who choose not to vaccinate or who do so selectively.

“We have seen measles used this way over and over,” Mack Rosenberg said. “Here, the narrative backfired and Maine officials swept under the rug the fact that the child’s measles strain was vaccine-related.”

According to the Mayo Clinic, measles is a viral infection typically accompanied by a skin rash, fever, cough, runny nose, sore throat, inflamed eyes and tiny white spots on the inner cheek.

On May 5, 2023, Maine’s Department of Health and Human Services warned that the Maine CDC had been notified of a positive measles test — ostensibly the state’s first measles case since 2019.

The health department said the child “received a dose of measles vaccine” and that Maine CDC officials were “considering the child to be infectious out of an abundance of caution.”

The news was quickly picked up by mainstream news outlets such as CNN, which blamed low vaccination rates for recent measles outbreaks, and USA Today, which stressed that the best way to prevent measles is for children and babies as young as 12 months to get the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine.

However, the child’s May 3, 2023, test results — which ICAN obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request — revealed that the measles strain was “consistent with vaccine strain” — meaning the vaccine caused the child’s rash symptoms.

Roughly 2% of people who get a measles vaccine develop a rash, according to a World Health Organization report. But the Maine CDC never went public about this information.

Nearly two weeks after the testing was done, the Maine CDC on May 16, 2023, announced that the child didn’t have an infectious strain of measles — but the announcement failed to state that the child’s rash was vaccine-related.

Why did the Maine CDC take so long to confirm the strain?

It’s inexcusable that Maine CDC officials took so long to determine the strain of measles, Mack Rosenberg said.

“Their fear is that such information would lead to more vaccine hesitancy,” she said. “However, obfuscating information in this way deprives the public of crucial information about vaccine safety and effectiveness.”

ICAN in a press release questioned why the Maine CDC raised the alarm and then took so long to confirm the specific strain.

Mack Rosenberg noted that mainstream news outlets “immediately” jumped on “the fearmongering bandwagon” before the strain type was identified.

“Yet when the true nature of this child’s exposure was revealed,” she said, ”ranks were closed to prevent the truth from getting out.”

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at CHD, told The Defender it was “reckless fear-mongering” to identify one case of measles in a vaccinated child and then issue a press release saying that anyone who isn’t immunized against measles, or doesn’t know their immunization status, should get vaccinated.

“Fear-mongering is formulaic: danger, solution and vilify those who do not conform,” he said.

If it’s well executed and done in coordination with media, it may get people to do what you want — but at a cost, he said. “One of the greatest threats to our public health is that our public health institutions lack integrity.”

Reports of measles outbreaks continue

Reports of measles outbreaks have continued since May of 2023.

CBS News on Sept. 24 reported a newly confirmed case of an elementary student in Minneapolis, bringing the number of confirmed cases in the Twin Cities to over 50.

So far in 2024, there have been 262 reported cases of measles, according to the CDC.

In 2024, cases were reported in Arizona, California, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York City, New York State, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and West Virginia.

From Jan. 1, 2020, to March 28, 2024, the CDC was notified of 338 confirmed measles cases. None of them resulted in death.

The Maine CDC on April 14 issued a health advisory regarding an “increase in global and domestic measles cases and outbreaks.” The advisory said that Maine has not seen any measles cases since 2019 and made no mention of the May 2023 case it initially reported.

Health risks from measles vaccine outweigh getting the disease

Although media reports sometimes blame the unvaccinated for recent outbreaks, Dr. Liz Mumper, a pediatrician, told The Defender in an earlier interview it doesn’t make sense to assume the unvaccinated are to blame.

She said cyclical outbreaks still occur even in populations with nearly 100% vaccination, such as college students.

The overwhelming majority of the approximately 130,000 measles deaths annually occur in countries in the global south that have weak health infrastructures, according to the World Health Organization. Those deaths, along with measles hospitalizations in the global north, are associated with vitamin A deficiency.

“Measles can be deadly if a child does not have access to safe water and medical care,” Mumper said. “In developed countries, fatalities from measles are very rare.”

Effective treatments include vitamin A in high doses and attention to hydration status, Mumper said.

Other pediatricians who spoke with The Defender said it’s likely better for a U.S. child to get a measles infection than to receive an MMR vaccine.

Dr. Michelle Perro, a pediatrician, said the idea of vaccinating children to protect them from getting measles isn’t completely without merit. “It is worth noting that training the immune system to recognize deleterious foreign pathogens has had public health success.”

However, the risks associated with the MMR vaccine — since it’s nearly impossible to get a single measles vaccine — outweigh getting measles “due to the rise in neurocognitive and other health challenges directly caused by the MMR vaccine” which contains toxic adjuvants, she said.

Dr. Paul Thomas, a retired pediatrician and author of “Vax Facts: What to Consider Before Vaccinating at All Ages & All Stages of Life,” agreed. He said the MMR vaccine is associated with many serious side effects including seizures, encephalopathy, death and autism.

Perro said children’s health took a big hit when Big Pharma and the American Medical Association over 100 years ago forced the public to transition from a natural health platform that included the use of health-promoting diets, herbal medicine and homeopathics to a drug-based system.

Measles can be challenging for children, Perro said, particularly when it’s accompanied by high fevers, diarrhea, uncomfortable rashes and potential negative sequelae such as pneumonia.

Parents must relearn how to manage common viral illnesses, she said. “Be clear, it is much easier to manage a febrile illness in a child than a chronic disease like autism or autoimmunity.”

The Defender reached out to the CDC for comment but did not receive a response by the deadline.

The post Maine Warned Public About a Measles Case — But Didn’t Mention it Was Caused by the Vaccine appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

“She was a different kid.”

Andrew Wakefield was canceled 25 years ago for pointing out that “the MMR causes gut inflammation in certain children, which leads to symptoms like autism.”

Autism rates in kids are 1 in 36 nationally, compared to 1 in 1500 in the not-so-distant past.

In California, it’s even worse: Autism rates are 1 in 22.

Whatever is causing this, the problem is only getting worse. Why are we not allowed to talk about this?

Full Video:

The post Nicole Shanahan Raises Serious Questions About Why This Happened to Her Daughter appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

Guest post by David Gortler, Pharm. D

Early January of 2024, Americans learned about the publication of an article from Elsevier’s Journal of Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy overseen by Dr. Danyelle Townsend, a professor at the University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy’s Department of Drug Discovery and Biomedical Sciences. As Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Townsend reviewed, approved, and published the article titled: “Deaths induced by compassionate use of hydroxychloroquine during the first COVID-19 wave: An estimate.”

The article was always a hypothesized estimate of people that might have died, but now even that estimate has been retracted. The reason for the retraction was that the Belgian dataset that was one of the bases for the piece was found to be “unreliable” (but in reality was fraudulent). The article also repeatedly referenced the New England Journal of Medicine’s 2020 RECOVERY trial. The RECOVERY trial is well known to be a deeply flawed study which, in addition to implementing late treatment in severely ill Covid patients, used extremely high doses of HCQ. 

The now retracted publication authors were all French or Canadian, with the primary author a pharmacist by the name of Alexiane Pradelle. According to a rudimentary internet search, Dr. Pradelle had never published before. Subsequently, listed authors were degreed as physicians, pharmacists, and/or professors of their respective disciplines. The main, corresponding author, Jean-Christophe Lega, runs the Evaluation and Modeling of Therapeutic Effects team at the University of Lyon.

Hydroxychloroquine’s Fabled Safety History Contrasts Data

In addition to being a hypothesized estimate, the article also attacked the legendary safety of HCQ, contradicting centuries of the safety of quinolines as a class. 

HCQ, chloroquine and quinine are structurally and pharmaceutically/mechanistically related, sharing the same quinoline structural group. The original iteration of quinine was a very fortunate discovery that dates back to the 1600s (at least) as a medicinal tipple used by Jesuit missionaries in South America. It is naturally found in the bark of the Cinchona tree (also called a “Quina-Quina” tree). 

Quinine is still available today both as a prescription drug, for similar indications as HCQ including malaria…and as a Covid-19 treatment. 

Quinine is so safe that it may be unique in that the FDA simultaneously permits its use without a prescription, as an ingredient in tonic waters. 

HCQ is similarly safe when used appropriately and under medical supervision. 

The CDC describes HCQ as “a relatively well tolerated medicine” and that “HCQ can be prescribed to adults and children of all ages. It can also be safely taken by pregnant women and nursing mothers” referring to its long-term use in chronic diseases. 

Basic logic dictates that, if a drug is safe for long-term use, it would also be safe for short-term use, including (and especially) in Covid-19 early treatment/pre-exposure prophylaxis type indications. 

These are pharmacology fundamentals that ought to be known by any pharmacist or physician – let alone to a professor serving as a Journal Editor-in-Chief at a taxpayer-funded state College of Pharmacy. 

Did not even one person on her editorial board of over 50 “peer-reviewers” and staff ponder the celebrated and storied history of HCQ (and its predecessors) and how incongruent this study’s findings were before choosing to publish data denigrating HCQ safety? 

The correct answer to that might actually be: “no”…

The publishing editorial board all seem to be laboratory bench (non-clinical) research scientists, per their biographies. Although the board does promote itself as meeting DEI requirements of being “gender diverse,” a more important question might be is if they have the appropriate credentials and experience to review and opine on clinically complex drug safety/epidemiology subject matters in the first place. 

Is just anyone now allowed to opine on specialty clinical pharmacology drug safety matters? 

In certain journals/news publications, the answer to that question seems to be: “yes”…

Those “17,000 Deaths” Never Occurred

Another point of confusion surrounded the interpretation and promotion of this little-known publication by the lay press. 

To be exact: there were never “17,000 deaths;” it was always a hypothetical extrapolation of people that could have died, based on “unreliable” (eg, actually, fraudulent) databases on top of the previously mentioned, problematic late-stage RECOVERY-trial-type dosing and timing. 

Still, Josh Cohen, a Forbes.com PhD senior healthcare columnist, used this publication to headline an absurdly biased op-ed against HCQ, stating that Trump’s HCQ proposal was “Linked To 17,000 Deaths.” Forbes’ Tufts, Harvard, and the University of Pennsylvania- trained “healthcare analyst” misrepresented or appeared to not understand the now-retracted study methodology or projections. 

It went downhill from there. Mere hours following the publication, very similar, now objectively inaccurate, highly politicized, and seemingly coordinated attacks on HCQ and Trump were published by: The Hill, Politico, Frontline News, Scripps News, the Guardian, KFF Health News, News Nation, Newsweek, AOL.com, Yahoo News, and Daily Kos, in addition to a multitude of prominent regional, international, and US federal news outlets, many falsely estimating that 17,000 deaths had already taken place and that the (imaginary) victims’ blood was already on Donald Trump’s hands. 

As of September 15, 2024, the above and other articles still show up very prominently (on the first page) of a Google search for “hydroxychloroquine deaths”…which never happened. 

Here are some screenshots of headlines referencing non-existent deaths based on a now-retracted study: 

Journal Editors Were Immediately Warned about Questionable Findings

Almost immediately following the January 2, 2024 publication, its critical flaws including basic miscalculations among many other deficiencies were brought to the attention of Dr. Townsend by Xavier Azalbert and non-profit BonSens.org attorneys starting on Jan 7, 2024. In fact, a total of 9 communications were sent by the above individuals, but none of them were ever shared as “Letters to The Editor” by Dr. Townsend in good faith to inform readers of specific potential shortcomings, as is otherwise commonly done. 

Dr. Townsend seemed to forget that bad medical data and publications can do actual patient harm, and kept legitimate and important study criticisms to herself. Instead of taking responsibility and making a leadership decision, she passed the buck to a Committee on Publication Ethics, delaying the needed retraction. 

It appallingly took 234 days (~7 months, from the January 2nd publication to August 26th) for Dr. Townsend’s Journal of Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy to finally retract the “unreliable” article. But at that point, untold millions around the world had already been (and continue to be) polluted with outrageously incorrect information about non-existent HCQ deaths. 

This raises some questions about Dr. Townsend’s duties and responsibilities as the Editor in Chief: 

• What efforts were made to correct incorrect headlines and articles published by the lay press, incorrectly frightening patients, pharmacists, and physicians, by fueling false tropes about HCQ? 
• What efforts were made to let news organizations know that data from the peer-reviewed publication was under question? (She refers to “a number of Letters to the Editor and correspondence from readers.”) 
• What immediate efforts are being made to notify news organizations and/or amplify search engine results regarding the now-retracted publication? 
• What funding source/individual paid the $3,490 (“excluding taxes and fees”) publication fee? (Note: reputable academic journals do not charge to publish articles.)
• Does Elsevier’s Journal of Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy meet certain definitions of what is known as a predatory publisher? 
• Was this Editorial Board qualified to review regulatory/drug safety/epidemiology/any other clinical subjects?
• Are the ramifications of this Journal’s publication and its subsequent retraction known to the University of South Carolina administration, co-faculty, and whichever body adjudicates its faculty Code of Ethics & Standards of Practice? 
• This isn’t the first time Townsend has needed to retract articles – a normally very rare occurrence for reputable journals. Will Elsevier, which publishes over 2,700 journals, permit further opining or publishing on clinical subjects by this editorial board? Can the Editor-in-Chief and/or editorial board be trusted to recuse themselves from opining on any topics that are not within their area of expertise? 
• What should be done to prevent a reoccurrence of this incident at the University of South Carolina and other taxpayer-funded institutions? 

Beyond that, what ramifications/punishments (if any) will occur for other prominent Covid-19 Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine authors/publishers whose articles were also retracted after they were found to be based on so-called “unreliable” (eg, non-existent) databases? 

Ethical scientists who believe in truth, transparency, and academic accountability are standing by, waiting for medical and academic justice. 

Unethical scientists are also watching this situation unfold, twisting their mustaches, learning about what they could potentially one day get away with. 

DISCLAIMER: This article is not medical advice. Do NOT start or discontinue ANY drug without first discussing it with a pharmacist or physician you know and trust. 

The post Those Published “17,000 Hydroxychloroquine Deaths” Never Happened appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

But it gets worse. Not only are patients not getting better, but because of the “treatment” being prescribed, many are falling victim to excessive diagnosis and serious mental breakdown risks.

A recent study conducted by Lauren Moran, a researcher at Mass General Brigham, reveals just how destructive the drugs prescribed to “treat” ADHD can be.

First, let’s remember that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is NOT based on science. There is no medical test (blood work, urine test, CAT/MRI, etc.,) that will reveal any known objective, confirmable abnormality in the brain that is ADHD.

In fact, ADHD is a list of behaviors in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. If a child is labeled with six of the eighteen behaviors, the ADHD label is affixed. Suddenly the five-year-old boy who wiggles too much in his school chair is abnormal and suffering from a mental illness that must be “treated” chemically.

Now, according to the research published in The American Journal of Psychiatry by Moran, patients “treated” with high doses of stimulants (ADHD drugs) were 60 percent more likely to suffer psychosis or mania than those NOT using the drugs.

There appear to be three issues with these findings. First, despite the fact that the diagnosis is completely subjective, not based in science, the behavioral health community has been so successful in labeling America’s children as abnormal and suffering from a mental illness that the label is just accepted without question and millions of American children have had their brains chemically altered to “treat” the alleged mental illness.

According to recent data, as of 2021, 41 million prescriptions for Adderall (amphetamine) were written for those suffering from ADHD. This number is the equivalent of one in eight Americans who “need” to have their brains chemically altered just to function “normally?”

Secondly, what is Adderall? The ADHD “treatment” Adderall is a stimulant, and it is listed by the federal government as a Schedule II drug which is the same classification as cocaine, heroin and meth and it is highly addictive.

In a Daily Mail article about Moran’s research, the reporter explained that “They (ADHD drugs) work by ramping up dopamine levels in the brain, which is linked to hallucinations, delusions and paranoia.”

Hmmm. Ya think? That’s interesting because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which approves these drugs for use, says “the mode of therapeutic action in ADHD is not known.”

Yep. Despite hundreds of millions of Americans taking these “treatments,” nobody at the FDA or the pharmaceutical company has a clue about how Adderall or any of the ADHD stimulant “treatments” work in the brain.

And this is in spite of the fact that the great and near great within the pharmaceutical industry and research community have had literally more than one hundred years to figure it out.

The fact is, little is known about the human brain and how it works, let alone how it works on prescription mind-altering drugs.

But that doesn’t stop the psychiatric community from labeling Americans with non-existent mental illnesses and the pharmaceutical industry from cashing in on “treatments” that nobody knows how the drugs “work” in the brain.

What is clear, is that the pharmaceutical drug, just like illegal drugs like speed, will change behavior. Whether that is a good thing is still being debated.

But it’s also important to consider the adverse side effects associated with Adderall.

Heart problems, hallucinations, aggression, hostility, paranoia, convulsions, fast heart rate, adverse growth effect, weight loss, mood changes, insomnia, psychotic episodes, and anxiety are some of the adverse events associated with the “treatment.”

So, the truth is there is no science to support an abnormality in the brain that is ADHD, no one has a clue about how the drugs “work” in the brain as “treatment” for the alleged ADHD and, finally, because of Moran’s research, is it now time to wonder how many Americans received additional mental illness diagnoses because of the adverse events associated with the ADHD drug “treatment?”

In other words, when a patient became paranoid or started hallucinating because of the ADHD drug “treatment” was the patient then diagnosed with another alleged mental illness and prescribed another prescription mind-altering drug?

Difficult to know. But this is the problem when behavior is labeled as an abnormality without any science to back it up.

Ironically, the ADHD “brain abnormality” is singularly an American mental illness. Yep. According to recent data, 11 percent of American kids under 17 years old are diagnosed with ADHD compared to just one percent of their European counterparts.

And America takes the lead in drugging its kids with ADHD drugs to a tune of an estimated $9.6 billion.

Finally, it cannot go unnoticed that like all alleged mental illnesses, the ADHD diagnosis is increasing, not decreasing. And with increased diagnosing comes increased drugging.

But no one in positions of power can understand why the suicide rate is increasing and is considered a crisis among America’s children. No one can understand why pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into suicide prevention measures hasn’t made a difference.

AbleChild must sound the alarm. Despite hundreds of billions of dollars dumped into the mental health industry, diagnosing and drugging is increasing and no one is getting better. Perhaps someday a smart lawmaker will ask why.

The post ABLECHILD: Adderall ADHD Drug Causes Psychosis and Mania appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

Louder With Crowder (LWC) founder and host Steven Crowder released a video on Thursday showing the moment he confronted New York City’s former Covid “czar” Dr. Jay Varma about statements he made to a “Mug Club Undercover” journalist.

Dr. Varma was the Senior Advisor for Public Health for Democrat NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio during the Covid pandemic.

The confrontation video was released just after LWC published undercover video of the doctor admitting to locking down citizens and forcing them to get shots while secretly attending drug-fueled orgies and raves.

See the undercover footage below:

The post Epic: Crowder Confronts NYC Lockdown Doctor Who Engaged In Drug-Fueled Orgies & Dance Parties While Citizen Gatherings Were Limited appeared first on True Blue To Truth.

In an undercover meeting with a reporter working for Steven Crowder’s popular Mug Club show, Dr. Jay Varma, the former Socialist Mayor Bill De Blasio’s COVID Czar for NYC, was caught revealing stunning details about how he ignored the mandates he pushed on citizens, like no indoor dining, during NYC’s brutal COVID lockdowns.

Screenshot

The first-hand account of Dr. Varma’s wild activities, which flew in the face of the iron-fisted mandates forced on citizens in NYC, is shocking.

In the video below, the senior advisor for public health in the mayor’s office admitted to holding secret drug-fueled sex parties in a room below a bank on Wall Street with his wife.

He admitted to hosting parties for between 8-9 individuals and explained how important the sex parties were for him and his fellow sex/drug party participants due to the stress of being locked down.

Dr. Varma admitted that he would have been “embarrassed” if anyone found out because his job was to run the COVID response for NYC, which included locking people down and shaming them for not getting the COVID vaccinations. New Yorkers would have been “pissed” if they found out, the sick doctor told the young undercover female reporter.

“I had to be kind of sneaky about it,” he told the female reporter. “I was running the entire COVID response for the city. We rented a hotel—we all took like, you know, Molly/Ecstacy. 8 to 10 of us were in a room. Like just being naked with friends…” he explained.

“We went to some, like, underground dance party—underneath a bank on Wall Street—We were all rolling,” he told the young woman as he laughingly admitted, “This was not Covid-friendly!”

He joked, “I did all this deviant, sexual stuff while I was, you know, like on TV and stuff.”

Dr. Varma reasoned that his job was very difficult and the wild sex and drug parties were necessary to help him “blow off steam.” He casually explained how, while he was forcing everyone else to adhere to his COVID mandates or face serious consequences, he needed to break the rules he placed on the over 8.8 million citizens living in NYC. “The only way I could do this job for the city was if I had some way to blow off steam every now and then,” he said.

Watch the stunning exchange here:

BREAKING: Former NYC Covid Czar Held Secret Drug-Fueled Sex Parties During Global Pandemic; Says New Yorkers Would Have Been “Pissed” If They Found Out Because He Was Running Entire Covid Response For City

Dr. Jay Varma, Former Senior Advisor for Public Health, NYC Mayor’s… pic.twitter.com/YrgniDUdFc

— Steven Crowder (@scrowder) September 19, 2024

The post JUST IN: Former NYC Mayor De Blasio’s COVID Czar Caught on Video Talking About Wild Sex and Drug Parties He and His Wife Hosted While He Locked Down Businesses and Shamed The Non-Vaccinated (VIDEO) appeared first on True Blue To Truth.