90 Miles From Tyranny

Wednesday, January 5, 2022

Government Is A Disease Masquerading As A Cure....

Here’s What You Should Know About Pfizer’s New COVID Drug Paxlovid

Prior to anyone getting involved with the new Pfizer COVID drug Paxlovid, there are quite a few things that you should consider instead of buying into the mainstream media narrative.

The pro-drug industry mainstream media are gushing about Pfizer’s new antiviral COVID medication pills, which were recently authorized by the US FDA.

Paxlovid, a drug approved by the FDA for use in patients aged 12 and upwards who’ve already tested positive with COVID-19 and are at high risk, has acquired an emergency use authorization.

Now would be the opportunity to discuss about Paxlovid in a reasonable and concise way. First and foremost, everyone should be aware that, like with COVID vaccinations, there was very little testing of this product’s short- and long-term security. Testing a new medication thoroughly should take several months, if not years.

The only actually positive news regarding this new drug is that it is in fact an actual combination of drugs.

Here are a few quick summaries of this new product:

It was authorized by the FDA without any outside consultations, thorough assessments of test data, or public input. Almost all of the regulatory activity was carried out behind closed doors.

For Pfizer this would be fantastic news. But it’s not good for the public. Earlier, Pfizer was also accused of manipulating COVID vaccine trial protocols to obtain emergency FDA authorisation for children.

It’s worth noting that just 21% of patients in the studies had a comorbidity, when in fact, 94 percent of COVID deaths have at least one comorbidity, with an average of four underlying medical disorders.

Protease enzymes are required for the virus to properly infect by completing the cycle before taking over the cell, according to antiviral science.

Paxlovid, or any other medicine categorized as a ‘Protease Inhibitor,’ inhibits or reduces the protease enzyme, causing the virus to be inhibited. Paxlovid prevents the 3CLPro protease from fragmenting the lengthy protein.

The virus is unable to determine which bits should be cut out and assembled. It is unable to duplicate itself. The COVID infection is readily eradicated.

Ivermectin is the most efficient and confirmed protease inhibitor in use globally, irrespective what the government claims. Ivermectin, like Paxlovid, inhibits the protease enzyme, but… Ivermectin has advantages in COVID treatment that Paxlovid does not have.

Ivermectin also has anti-coagulant and anti-inflammatory properties, which are both seen in COVID infections. And IVM has already been used reliably for decades, with numerous medical research and clinical outcomes demonstrating its antiviral and anti-inflammatory efficacy.

Paxlovid must be used in conjunction with Ritonavir, an HIV/AIDS medicine that prevents Paxlovid from being broken down so that it can inhibit or decrease the enzyme, disrupting the viral life cycle.

Ritonavir helps Paxlovid stay active in the body by acting as a booster. Ritonavir has its own black box warning, and adverse effects comprise liver, pancreatic, and heart problems that can be fatal. Is it true that the general public wants to take an HIV/AIDS drug?

A five-day treatment regimen consists of 20 Paxlovid pills and 10 Ritonavir pills. Taking 6 medicines daily can cause issues for many of the older folks specifically.

Paxlovid lowers hospitalization/death by 89 percent for persons with established COVID infection, according to a press release from Pfizer, when administered within three days of symptom start. So, in the therapy group, 5 of 697 hospitalizations resulted in no deaths, compared to 44/682 hospitalizations resulting in 9 deaths.

Consider the statement that this medicine combination should be taken within three days after symptom start. Here are some of the major issues that ordinary people face: how can you distinguish COVID symptoms from flu or cold symptoms; how can you get a quick test; how can you contact your doctor within a day or two and determine whether you really have COVID (no drug interactions) and, if so, get a prescription; how can you get the prescription filled quickly? None of these issues are simple to deal with and resolve. For nearly everyone, this new combination treatment is unrealistic and unworkable.

A 10-fold reduction in viral load at day 5 compared to placebo was also reported, demonstrating significant action against SARS-CoV-2 and (allegedly) the highest viral load reduction recorded to date for a COVID-19 oral antiviral drug.

It would have been fascinating to compare the Pfizer medicine to an ivermectin treatment.

How does the Pfizer medicine stack up against the Dr. George Fareed and Dr. Brian Tyson protocol, for example? Fareed and Tyson, on the other hand, had a lot more patients (about 7,000) on the drug combination, but they had fewer hospitalizations (4) as well as the same amount of fatalities (0).

As a result, the Fareed and Tyson protocol is far superior. And, after billions of usage around the world, IVM’s safety protocol is significantly more validated than Pfizer’s.

See this article for a detailed comparison of IVM and Paxlovid. Ivermectin’s capacity to block 3CL protease has been scientifically shown.

Dysgeusia (taste disturbance), diarrhoea, and vomiting were the most prevalent side effects reported during treatments and up to 34 days following the final dosage of Paxlovid. What, on the other hand, are the chances of more serious side effects appearing months or years later?

Paxlovid should not be combined with certain other medications, either because of its action, which can cause dangerous rises in patients’ blood levels, or because some medicines can...

Never Accept The Leftist Premise...

Is There Redemption If You Have Sold Your Soul?

I got a bad disease

Up from my brain is where I bleed

Insanity it seems

Has got me by my soul to squeeze

Well all the love from me

With all the dying trees I scream

The angels in my dreams, yeah

Have turned to demons of greed

That's mean

A Gift from the Mendacious Nikole Hannah-Jones to Conservative Lawmakers

The creator of The 1619 Project exposes herself on national television and Twitter.

If political leaders across the country are looking for more evidence that they are justified in banning The 1619 Project curriculum in schools they can refer to comments made by the Project’s own creator, Nikole Hannah-Jones, on December 26, during the Sunday show line-up, on NBC’s Meet the Press.

In her comments to Chuck Todd, she revealed herself to be a dissembler regarding her role in promoting 1619 Project classroom lessons. Then in tweets that insisted that all critics henceforth engage only with her new book The 1619 Project: A New Origin Story, a 600-page expansion, she admitted that the original project, upon which the lessons are based, is flawed.

Shortly after the program aired, at 10:21 a.m., Hannah-Jones tweeted, “It is revealing when critics of the 1619 Project, 2 yrs later, refuse to critique the book & instead keep rehashing arguments abt the magazine. That’s because we responded to good-faith critique, we revised in response, we included 1,000 endnotes, historians wrote half the essays.” Phil Magness, Senior Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, who has been among the earliest and most frequent critics of the economic claims promoted by The 1619 Project, and who had reached out to Hannah-Jones, commented, “I witnessed this process directly as one of those critics over the last 2 years. And there’s not a word of truth to what she is claiming.” Hannah-Jones, who refuses to engage in debate, in typical fashion, attacked the economic historian’s credentials.

Sixteen minutes later, at 10:37 a.m. she went after Victoria Bynum, one of the historians who early on requested corrections to the Project. In December 2019, Bynum had signed Princeton historian Sean Wilentz’s letter to the editor, which was also signed by historians James McPherson, Gordon Wood, and James Oakes. At 6:28 a.m. Bynum had commented on Oakes’s recent article in Catalyst magazine responding to New York Times Magazine editor Jake Silverstein’s November 12 defense of the Project—a promotional lead-up to the November 16 publication of the hardcover book, which is copyrighted by the Times. Bynum summarized it as a critique of the political agenda, specifically Black Nationalism, motivating the project. Hannah-Jones tweeted, with no reference to these points, “Is it common ‘very serious’ practice, 2.5 years later, to critique the unrevised work and to not engage the updated version? Asking for a friend.” Bynum politely replied that neither she nor Oakes was commenting on the new book. As revealed by her defensive response, Hannah-Jones was admitting that the original 1619 Project, the August 18, 2019, issue of the New York Times Magazine, was error-riddled. As Magness noted, “Nikole Hannah-Jones’s latest argument is to claim that the original 1619 Project—as published in the New York Times as part of a multimillion dollar advertising blitz—was just a rough draft, and the new book is the revised version by which it should be judged. Seriously.”

There was also an education blitz. Immediately upon the publication of the original in 2019 prepackaged lessons were shipped to 3,500 schools, a number which soon rose to 4,500. It is hard to know how many teachers are using these materials today. Hannah-Jones has many teachers among her hundreds of thousands of...

Food Costs Likely To Rise as Farmers' Expenses Shoot Up

Bad policy and unpredictable nature are sending food prices through the roof.

Famine is one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse for good reason; hunger was an unwelcome companion for most of human history. The threat it poses declined in recent decades because of innovations in agriculture and increasing prosperity. But the largely policy-inflicted economic disruptions of the past two years partially reversed progress made towards feeding the world and alleviating poverty. Now, with food prices on the rise, there's a danger that hunger will follow.

"I want to say this loud and clear right now, that we risk a very low crop in the next harvest," Svein Tore Holsether, the CEO and president of fertilizer giant Yara International, warned in November. "I'm afraid we're going to have a food crisis."

Holsether worried about the rising cost of energy and especially of natural gas, which is needed to make ammonia from which urea, a key fertilizer component, is synthesized.

"Prices for the humble chemical — yes, the stuff in urine — are soaring to levels not seen in over a decade," The New York Times agreed a month later. "People and industries of all kinds are feeling the shocks."

A combination of always-unpredictable nature, bad policy, and busted supply chains (also largely from policy decisions) dramatically hiked prices for natural gas and its products. Prices for alternatives to urea are also rising because of demand and parallel political decisions. The U.S. Treasury agreed in December to suspend sanctions on potash from Belarus from which about 20 percent of the world's supply of the stuff is sourced, but other high trade barriers remain in place for fertilizer and its components. The result is that major inputs for producing the food that we eat are becoming increasingly dear when they can be found at all.

"Among farmers and ranchers, very few topics are being discussed as much as the skyrocketing cost of fertilizer and increasing...

House Republican leaders are targeting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) over the January 6 riot, saying she refuses to respond to their questions about security at the U.S. Capitol and that her select committee is in fact a “cover-up” for the speaker’s missteps surrounding the riot.

Four Republicans, led by GOP Conference chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), held a press call Monday to deliver the party’s messaging on the riot, which Pelosi is currently probing through her Democrat-led select committee.

“This partisan sham committee is not focused on answering the most important questions of why the Capitol was left unprepared that day and how we can ensure this never happens again,” Stefanik began.

“Most importantly, the American people deserve to know what the mainstream media refuses to cover: The fact that the only office that is off-limits to this partisan sham investigation is Speaker Pelosi’s office,” Stefanik continued. “This is a political weapon, and it’s used to cover up for Nancy Pelosi’s failures.”

House Administration Committee ranking member Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL), who was also on the call, detailed a letter he wrote to Pelosi on Monday demanding the security officials who ultimately report to her — the House Sergeant-at-Arms and the House Chief Administrative Officer — comply with Republican requests for information about how the Capitol was protected on January 6.

In his letter, Davis accused Pelosi of continuing to “obstruct Republican access to House records relating to the security preparedness of the Capitol complex on January 6th, 2021.”

He also cited letters he sent early last year to both security officials and Pelosi that he said went unaddressed, but he added that a third security entity, the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP), was immediately responsive to his initial letter.

In his new letter, the Illinois Republican highlighted that former USCP Chief Steven Sund and former Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving had “conflicting” accounts about what occurred leading up to and during the January 6 riot, namely whether Irving rejected Sund’s request for National Guard presence on January 6 because he was worried about the “optics” of it and who in the “chain of command” was directing Irving as the Capitol...