The Real Experts Are Stepping Forward to Restore the Scientific Definition of “Climate Change” BY RHODA WILSON

Most of the energy in the Earth’s atmosphere comes from the Sun. It has long been recognised that changes in the so-called total solar irradiance (“TSI”) – the amount of energy emitted by the Sun, over the last few centuries – could have contributed substantially to recent climate change.

Crucially, a 2021 CERES-led study found that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”) only considered a small subset of the published TSI datasets when they were assessing the role of the Sun in climate change and that this subset only included “low solar variability” datasets. As a result, the IPCC was premature in ruling out a substantial role of the Sun in recent climate change.

CERES, the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences, is a multi-disciplinary and independent research group whose aims are to address important issues in the fields of environmental and earth sciences.

Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE


Follow The Exposé’s official Channel on Telegram here
Join the conversation in our Telegram Discussion Group here

The study, which is the most comprehensive to date, was conducted by 23 experts in the fields of solar physics and climate science from 14 countries and published in Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics (“RAA”). It examined the role of the Sun in climate change over the last 150 years and found that the IPCC may have been premature in their conclusion that recent climate change is mostly caused by human greenhouse gas emissions.

The authors wrote that scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider.  In a press release announcing their study, CERES gave examples of how, by selecting certain datasets, IPCC skews their conclusions and noted what various experts had to say about the study’s findings.  Below is a sample of what the real experts had to say.

CERES co-team leader Dr. Ronan Connolly, lead author of the study, said:

“The IPCC is mandated to find a consensus on the causes of climate change. I understand the political usefulness of having a consensus view in that it makes things easier for politicians. However, science doesn’t work by consensus. In fact, science thrives best when scientists are allowed to disagree with each other and to investigate the various reasons for disagreement. I fear that by effectively only considering the datasets and studies that support their chosen narrative, the IPCC have seriously hampered scientific progress into genuinely understanding the causes of recent and future climate change. I am particularly disturbed by their inability to satisfactorily explain the rural temperature trends.”

How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate, Press Release, 6 August 2021

WeiJia Zhang, Professor of Physics at Shaoxing University (China) and a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society (UK) said:

“The quest to understand how the Earth’s climate is connected to the Sun is one of the oldest science subjects studied by the ancient Greeks and Chinese. This review paper blows open the mystery and explains why it has been so difficult to make scientific advances so far. It will take the real understanding of fluid dynamics and magnetism on both the Sun and Earth to find the next big leap forward.”

How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate, Press Release, 6 August 2021

László Szarka, from the ELKH Institute of Earth Physics and Space Science (Hungary) and also a member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences said:

“This review is a crucial milestone on the way to restoring the scientific definition of ‘climate change’ that has become gradually distorted over the last three decades. The scientific community should finally realise that in science there is no authority or consensus; only the right to seek the truth.”

How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate, Press Release, 6 August 2021

Recently, Dr. John Robson of the Climate Discussion Nexus (“CDN”) interviewed Dr. Connolly on the role of the Sun in recent climate change.

CDN published a 20-minute “explainer” video including extracts from this interview and a discussion of some of CERES’ recent scientific research. Although the video covers quite a few technical points, they are explained in a very clear and accessible manner.

The video refers to the CERES study described earlier in this article, namely: ‘How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate’ and you can read a brief description of the topics the video covers HERE.

Climate Discussion Nexus: Looking at The Sun, 1 June 2022 (20 mins)

YouTube, of course, has labelled the video to “nudge” viewers away from facts and towards the UN globalist “party line.”

If the video is removed from YouTube you can watch it on Rumble HERE.

https://expose-news.com/2022/06/05/real-climate-experts-are-stepping-forward/

The UK Government’s Contempt Towards EMF Health Impacts Is Glaringly Obvious BY RHODA WILSON

“The current plan with regard to 5G is to put out tens of millions of 5G antennae all over the EU, all over the US, all over many other parts of the world, such that we will be irradiated almost continuously no matter where we go. And the current plan is to do that without even a single biological safety test of genuine 5G radiation. This is absolutely insane,” Professor Martin Pall told Clinical Environmental Medicine (“Scopro”) in 2019.

Scopro: 5G Lack of risk assessment, Prof. Martin Pall, 29 August 2019 (10 mins)

Scopro is a learning solutions service provider in the field of advanced medical and scientific training: “We have developed our own education in collaboration with the European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) and the German Association of Environmental Physicians (dbu).”

Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE


Follow The Exposé’s official Channel on Telegram here
Join the conversation in our Telegram Discussion Group here

UK MPs Launch an “Inquiry”

In March 2020 the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee launched an inquiry into Broadband and the road to 5G – how realistic the ambition is, what is needed to achieve it, and what the Government’s target will mean for businesses and consumers.

UK Parliament: Broadband and the road to 5G, Inquiry

In its latest report dated 22 December 2020, the Committee’s conclusions focused on funding and the ability or inability of the UK government to roll out and meet its “pledge to deliver nationwide gigabit connectivity by 2025” entirely disregarding the health impacts of their ambitions.  Earlier in the report, the Committee noted the Government’s targets:

The timescales and technological scope of the Government’s targets for gigabit connectivity have evolved considerably over recent years. In 2018, the Government set out its ambition for full-fibre broadband to reach 15 million premises by 2025, with nationwide coverage by 2033. However, the Conservative Party’s 2019 manifesto accelerated this aim stating, “we intend to bring full-fibre and gigabit-capable broadband to every home and business across the UK by 2025”. Since the election, and in its evidence to us, the Government dropped the manifesto’s explicit mention of full-fibre, pledging instead the technology-agnostic aim of nationwide gigabit-capable broadband by 2025.

Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Broadband and the road to 5G, Fourth Report of Session 2019-21, pg. 16, 17 December 2020

At the end of the report is a list of written evidence received by the Committee.

We made a cursory search through the report for references made to evidence submitted looking for an indication that the health impacts of rolling out 5G had been duly considered.  Shockingly, the only evidence the report seemed to consider was from Government agencies and officials, Ofcom and the telecommunications industry – for example, O2, Virgin Media, TalkTalk, Openreach, Truespeed Communications, Sky, Confederation of British Industry (“CBI”) – and mostly in the form of oral evidence.  Were the British public invited to give oral evidence we wonder?

As an indication the Committee had at least considered it, the only reference to evidence submitted by the major stakeholders – the British public – is that shown in the image below:

Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Broadband and the road to 5G, Fourth Report of Session 2019-21, pg. 32, 17 December 2020

Based on whose evidence the Committee took into consideration, the Government’s perceived “stakeholders” can be presumed as themselves and corporations who stand to make substantial financial gains and it’ll come as no surprise that “health” was only mentioned six times in their report:

  • DCMS told us that the technology had the potential to transform productivity, and to open up new business models, especially in rural and more isolated areas. Better connectivity will enable more people to work from home, with less reliance on travelling into cities, and lower carbon emissions. The public sector, especially local authorities and health services, will be able to operate more efficiently by delivering more services online. (pg. 13)

  • … the public’s lack of understanding about 5G to be linked to the spread of health concerns about the technology … (“health” is mentioned three times in the excerpt from pg. 32 as noted in the image above)

  • Mobile network operator O2 told us that “many of the most innovative and transformative applications of 5G, such as smart cities and 5G enabled healthcare and agriculture, require almost universal coverage.” (pg. 33)

  • West Wales 5G and EMF Health Awareness Group (BRO0073) (merely mentioned as one of the 158 items listed under “Published Written Evidence” on pg. 59)

For those who wish to read it, we have attached a copy of West Wales 5G and EMF Health Awareness Group’s written evidence (BRO0073) below which begins: “[We have] created this briefing document so that the Committee may educate themselves about the detrimental environmental and health factors implicit in the planned rollout of 5G.”

BRO0073Download

Links to all written evidence received and published by the Committee can be found either in the list at the end of their report or by following this LINK.

The Committee has added a header for each piece of written evidence they publish, including BRO0073 attached above.  Their header tells us all we need to know about how seriously, or rather the disdain with which, the Government views the evidence submitted to them. It is, quite frankly, an insult and an outrage:

European Union Assesses 5G Health Impacts

In July 2021 the European Union published a 198-page report: ‘Health Impact of 5G: Current state of knowledge of 5G-related carcinogenic and reproductive / developmental hazards as they emerge from epidemiological studies and in vivo experimental studies’.

The report’s executive summary includes the background on wireless communication used for mobile telephones and, for example, Wi-Fi using radiofrequency (“RF”) electromagnetic fields (“EMF”):

The introduction of the next generation of RF, 5G, has begun on mobile networks. 5G is not a wholly new technology, but an evolution of already existing G1 to G4 technologies.

5G networks will work within several different frequency bands, the lower frequencies of which are being proposed for the first phase of 5G networks. Several of these frequencies have been or are currently being used for earlier mobile communication generations. There are also plans to use much higher radio frequencies at later stages of the 5G technology evolution.

The new bands are well above the ultra-high frequency (UHF) range, having wavelengths in the centimetre (3–30 GHz) or millimetre ranges (MMW) at 30-300 GHz. These latter bands have traditionally been used for radar and microwave links and very few have been studied for their impact on human health. [emphasis our own]

European Union: Health Impact of 5G, July 2021

Although the EU’s report is limited to two two aspects of health – cancer and the babies’ development – the abstract clearly demonstrates that the health impacts need to be studied and assessed before subjecting populations to unavoidable and widespread EMF:

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency (RF) EMF as ‘possibly carcinogenic to humans’ (Group 2B) and recently recommended RF exposure for re-evaluation ‘with high priority’ (IARC, 2019).

The review shows: 1) 5G lower frequencies (700 and 3 600 MHz): a) limited evidence of carcinogenicity in epidemiological studies; b) sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental bioassays; c) sufficient evidence of reproductive / developmental adverse effects in humans; d) sufficient evidence of reproductive / developmental adverse effects in experimental animals; 2) 5G higher frequencies (24.25-27.5 GHz): the systematic review found no adequate studies either in humans or in experimental animals.

Conclusions: 1) cancer: FR1 (450 to 6 000 MHz): EMF are probably carcinogenic for humans, in particular related to gliomas and acoustic neuromas; FR2 (24 to 100 GHz): no adequate studies were performed on the higher frequencies; 2) reproductive developmental effects: FR1 (450 to 6 000 MHz): these frequencies clearly affect male fertility and possibly female fertility too. They may have possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, foetuses and newborns; FR2 (24 to 100 GHz): no adequate studies were performed on non-thermal effects of the higher frequencies. [emphasis our own]

European Union: Health Impact of 5G, July 2021

The UK government’s contempt towards EMF health impacts is glaringly obvious.

https://expose-news.com/2022/06/05/ukgov-contempt-towards-emf-health-impacts-is-obvious/

Monkeypox, Hepatitis & Covid-19: Public Health has been Hijacked & the Mainstream Media are lying to you…

Do you remember that old saying?

‘You wait one hundred years for a pandemic and then two come along at once.’

No? We didn’t think so.

Which means if you have at least one inquisitive bone in your body you are probably wondering why we’ve gone from being told to stay at home and isolate if we come into close contact with anyone who has allegedly tested positive for Covid-19, to being instructed to stay at home and isolate if we come into close contact with anyone who has allegedly tested positive for monkeypox?

Anyone who honestly believes that this is simply because we’ve gone from having a “dangerous” respiratory virus circulating around the world to having a “dangerous” zoonosis virus circulating around the world has quite frankly been watching too much BBC News and not done their homework.

The truth is there is nothing simple about it, and the reasons authorities with the help of the mainstream media have gone from spreading fear and propaganda around an alleged virus with a fatality rate of less than 0.2%, to spreading fear and propaganda around an alleged virus that has rarely been seen outside of Africa in 50 years are multi-faceted, sinister, and unbelievable without the context and evidence to support them.

If you believe in germ theory and the mainstream narrative on the existence and behaviour of viruses then you will likely question whether the Covid-19 virus was leaked from a lab, namely the Wuhan Institute of Virology. There is plenty of evidence out there to support this, including evidence that suggests the pharmaceutical giant Moderna had a major role to play in that.

So would it surprise you to know that there is now emerging evidence that if this circulating monkeypox virus even exists, it too was manipulated and leaked from a bio-lab?  

If you don’t believe in germ theory and are of the opinion that viruses do not exist or behave as we are officially told then you have likely questioned the existence of the Covid-19 virus from the very start. There is also plenty of evidence out there to support this from the highly questionable and unreliable PCR test, to the horrific way the elderly and vulnerable were denied medical treatment, starved and dehydrated, and given end of life medication and then falsely labelled as having died of Covid-19.

So would it surprise you to know that there is a huge amount of evidence that suggests the alleged circulating monkeypox disease is in fact a cover-up for the damage done to the natural immune system by Covid-19 vaccination? The evidence even suggests this same damage may have a role to play in the alleged hepatitis outbreak of unknown origin we’re also being told is currently taking place in numerous countries.

What we believe is important to us individually, and those who believe in germ theory will disagree with those who do not and visa versa. To the point where factions develop among those who do not religiously watch BBC News and accept what they are told as Gospel. But these actions play into the hands of the authorities who are currently seeking ultimate power and control over the ordinary hardworking people.

Because whilst we’re busy arguing amongst ourselves we’re losing sight of the end game here, and that is the dystopian fourth industrial revolution. A “revolution” that involves the introduction of social credit systems and digital identities. A “revolution” that involves nations losing sovereignty and granting unprecedented powers to the World Health Organization. A “revolution” that involves you owning nothing and allegedly being happy about it.

So here we’re going to provide evidence of what’s really going on with this alleged monkeypox outbreak in the hope of promoting healthy discussion and the wish that you’ll realise that whilst the who’s, what’s and why’s are important, preventing the Dystopian end game is what matters most here.

Let’s start with the obvious.

Is it just a coincidence that the Monkeypox and Hepatitis outbreaks are occurring at the same time the World Health Organization is looking to be granted unprecedented powers?

The proposed International Treaty on Pandemic Prevention and Preparedness builds on the growing reach of the International Health Regulations, in transferring more power to the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare emergencies and then require countries, under treaty obligations, to follow WHO instructions.

If successful in implementing it, the following consequences may be realised –

1.    Countries (people) will lose sovereignty over major aspects of daily life to unelected international bureaucrats, who are subject to significant conflicts of interest from private individuals and industry.

2.    These WHO bureaucrats will decide on the criteria for and timing of such take-overs.

3.    The track record of the WHO in managing international outbreaks is poor. It is inherently dangerous to delegate control over complex issues that heavily impact the economy, society and public health to individuals in a distant location with no community or relevant national affiliations, and no direct stake in the outcomes.

4.    Such centralization is contrary to the fundamental pillars of community-based, locally organised healthcare and antithetical to the principles of individual rights and autonomy upon which the WHO’s constitution is based.

5.    The increasing emphasis on pandemics instead of on the actual major causes of human illness and mortality is inappropriate, and the diversion of funds and activity will have hugely negative impacts on the overall population and individual health.

On the 3rd March 2022, the European Council adopted a decision to authorise the opening of negotiations for the treaty.

The intergovernmental negotiating body, tasked with drafting and negotiating this international instrument, will hold its next meeting by 1 August 2022, to discuss progress on a working draft. It will then deliver a progress report to the 76th World Health Assembly in 2023, with the aim to adopt the instrument by 2024.

Then in April, the World Health Organisation issued a global alert about a new form of severe acute Hepatitis (inflammation of the liver) with an unknown cause affecting previously healthy children in the UK, Spain and Ireland.

Then in May we were told about the emergence of Monkeypox that is now allegedly rampant in the following countries –

This was one week before the planned World Health Assembly that began on 22nd May 2022. Where health ministers from 194 countries around the world met with the World Health Organization to discuss among other things, the proposed pandemic treaty.

Publicising both a hepatitis outbreak of unknown origin affecting children and a monkeypox outbreak just as we seem to be saying goodbye to Covid-19 is a great way to convince these health ministers to sign away their nation’s sovereignty and grant unprecedented powers to the WHO, isn’t it?

So if you believe in coincidences then that’s fine, you can probably just add this to the list of ridiculous “coincidences” that have occurred over the past two years. But we don’t, especially when we look at the Bill Gates connection.

Is it just a coincidence that the Monkeypox and Hepatitis outbreaks are occurring at the same time Bill Gates is advocating for the implementation of a GERM team?

The founder of Microsoft, Mr Bill Gates is the largest private funder of the UK’s Medicine Regulator the MHRA, also happens to hold huge shares in Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna, and just so happens to also be the largest private funder of the World Health Organization.

If you believe he does this because he wants to save mankind and eradicate disease then we have to wonder if you’re also of the opinion that pigs can fly? You only need to look at the insane amount of power, and influence that has been granted to Mr Gates through doing this as well as the mind-blowing amount of money he has made through his shares in vaccines.

Throughout May 2022, just after the news of a hepatitis outbreak, and in the midst of the news of a monkeypox outbreak, Bill Gates was giving copious amounts of mainstream airtime to promote his new book and idea of a GERM team to the world.

According to Gates the GERM team will monitor sovereign nations and decide when they need to suspend people’s civil liberties, force them to wear masks and close borders. The global team will be made up of 3,000 disease experts under the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) and will receive around $1 billion per year in funding.  And the GERM team’s most important job is to engage in GERM games.

In Gates’ new book, ‘How to prevent the Next Pandemic’, he described the GERM team:

“I call it the GERM—Global Epidemic Response and Mobilisation—team, and the job of its people should be to wake up every day asking themselves the same questions: “Is the world ready for the next outbreak? What can we do to be better prepared?” They should be fully paid, regularly drilled, and prepared to mount a coordinated response to the next threat of a pandemic. The GERM team should have the ability to declare a pandemic and work with national governments and the World Bank to raise money for the response very quickly.”

You might have noticed one obvious activity that’s missing from GERM’s job description: treating patients. That’s by design.

But GERM’s response to an active outbreak is only one part of their work, Gates wrote on his blog, “the team’s most important job is helping to run outbreak response exercises that test whether the world is ready for the next major outbreak. Militaries regularly run war games to evaluate their readiness—we should do the same with disease threats.”

As we said before, if you believe in coincidences that’s fine. But we don’t. So what’s really going on here and how are authorities able to claim there is a monkeypox outbreak?

Exhibit A – The alleged Monkeypox Virus has been manipulated and deliberately released from a Biolab

Monkeypox illness usually begins with a fever before a rash develops one to five days later, often beginning on the face then spreading to other parts of the body. The rash changes and goes through different stages before finally forming a scab which later falls off. An individual is contagious until all the scabs have fallen off and there is intact skin underneath.

The disease has always been extremely rare and was first identified in humans in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in a 9-year-old boy. Since then, human cases of monkeypox have been reported in 11 African countries. It wasn’t until 2003 that the first monkeypox outbreak outside of Africa was recorded, and this was in the United States, and it has never been recorded in multiple countries at the same time.

Until now.

A new study published by Portugal’s National Institute of Health has uncovered evidence that the virus responsible for the Monkeypox outbreak allegedly sweeping across Europe, America and Australia, has been heavily manipulated in a lab by scientists, and further evidence suggests it has been released intentionally.

The study was published May 23rd 2022 and can be accessed in full here.

Source

Scientists from the NIH collected clinical specimens from 9 monkeypox patients between May 15th and May 17th 2022 and analysed them.

The scientists concluded that the multi-country outbreak of monkeypox that we’re now allegedly witnessing is most likely the result of a single origin because all sequenced viruses released so far tightly cluster together.

They also concluded that the virus belongs to the West African clade of monkeypox viruses. However, they found it it is most closely related to monkeypox viruses that were exported from Nigeria to several countries in 2018 and 2019, namely the UK, Israel and Singapore.

But while the virus closely resembles those exported from Nigeria in 18/19, it is still vastly different with over 50 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are genetic variations.

Source

Richard Neher, a computational evolutionary biologist at the University of Basel has publicly claimed in the mainstream media that –

“Based on normal evolutionary timelines, scientists would expect a virus like monkeypox to pick up that many mutations over perhaps 50 years, not four. That is somewhat remarkable.”

So we allegedly have a circulating monkeypox virus in several first-world countries at the same time for the first time in history, and this alleged virus has over 50 mutations that have occurred in the space of 4 years instead of the 50 years it should have taken.

Are we really to believe that if this virus exists that it has occurred naturally? The whole thing reeks of viral manipulation in a biolab.

The question is whether it has been accidentally released or released intentionally? The fact the WHO and Bill Gates are seeking more power alongside the fact a Munich Security Conference simulation held in March 2021 was based around a scenario of a monkeypox outbreak occurring in May 2022 suggests the latter.

Exhibit B – The Munich Security Conference

Back in March 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initative (NTI) partnered with the Munich Security Conference to conduct a tabletop exercise on reducing high-consequence biological threats.

The exercise examined gaps in national and international biosecurity and pandemic preparedness architectures—exploring opportunities to improve prevention and response capabilities for high-consequence biological events.

Here’s the scenario that they conducted:

Source – Page 10

Are we really to believe it’s just a coincidence that we’re now witnessing an actual monkeypox outbreak, with the first cases being reported to the World Health Organisation on May 13th 2022?

If you believe in germ theory then it looks like you have your answer as to how authorities have managed to create a monkeypox outbreak. Evidence suggests it has been designed in a lab and intentionally released.

But what about those of you who don’t believe in germ theory. What exactly could the authorities be doing to get away with claiming there is a monkeypox outbreak across most first-world countries?

Exhibit C – Monkeypox is very similar to Shingles

Human monkeypox is a zoonosis thought to usually occur sporadically in the tropical rainforest of western and central Africa. But the exact incidence and geographical distribution are actually unknown because many cases are not recognised.

The reason?

Monkeypox is commonly mistaken for chickenpox / shingles.

According to a scientific study published in 1988, between 19981-1986, 977 persons with skin eruption not clinically diagnosed as human monkeypox were laboratory tested in Zaire (now known as the Democratic Republic of Congo).

The results were as follows –

‘3.3% of human monkeypox cases were found among 730 patients diagnosed as cases of chickenpox, 7.3% among cases diagnosed as “atypical chickenpox” and 6.1% among cases with skin rash for which clinical diagnosis could not be established.

The diagnostic difficulties were mainly based on clinical features characteristic of chickenpox: regional pleomorphism (in 46% of misdiagnosed cases), indefinite body-distribution of skin eruptions (49%), and centripetal distribution of skin lesions (17%). Lymph-node enlargement was observed in 76% of misdiagnosed patients. In the absence of smallpox, the main clinical diagnostic problem is the differentiation of human monkeypox from chickenpox.’

Exhibit D – The Pfizer Jab Distribution and Monkeypox Outbreak Coincidence

The alleged monkeypox disease is extremely rare, has rarely been seen outside of Africa, and has never been recorded in multiple countries outside of Africa at the same time, until now.

Here’s a reminder of where the World Health Organisation have identified cases of Monkeypox since early May 2022 –

And here’s a map showing main distributions of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection –

Exhibit E – The Herpes Connection

Evidence suggests we’re not witnessing an outbreak of monkeypox across first-world countries at all. Instead, we’re witnessing the consequences of the damage that has been caused to immune systems by the Covid-19 injections in the very same first-world countries, and authorities are rushing to cover it up.

Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) is a common cause of ulcerative skin disease in both immune-compromised and immune-competent individuals. Most individuals infected with HSV have either no symptoms or mild symptoms that go unnoticed.

When symptoms do appear, they initially present with tingling and/or redness, followed by blister-like lesions that rapidly merge into open, weeping sores. The sores are often quite painful and can be accompanied by a fever and swollen lymph glands.

Just like monkeypox.

In immune-compromised people, as in those with Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, the frequency and symptoms of HSV outbreaks can sometimes be severe, spreading from the mouth or genitals to deeper tissues in the lungs or brain. As such, HSV has been classified as an “AIDS-defining condition” if lasting longer than a month or presenting in the lungs, bronchi or oesophagus. 

Did you know herpes is listed as an adverse event of special interest (AESI) by Pfizer in relation to their Covid-19 injection?

Exhibit F – The Confidential Pfizer Documents

he US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) attempted to delay the release of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine safety data for 75 years despite approving the injection after only 108 days of safety review on December 11th, 2020.

But in early January 2022, Federal Judge Mark Pittman ordered them to release 55,000 pages per month. They released 12,000 pages by the end of January.

One of the documents contained in the court-ordered data dump is ‘reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf’. Page 21 of the confidential document contains data on adverse events of special interest, with one of these specifically being herpes viral infections.

According to the document by the end of February 2021, just 2 months after the Pfizer vaccine was granted emergency use authorisation in both the USA and UK, Pfizer has received 8,152 reports relating to herpes infection, and 18 of these had already led to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) is a systemic, dysfunctional inflammatory response that requires long intensive care unit (ICU) stay. It is characterized with a high mortality rate depending on the number of organs involved. It can be caused by herpes infection as this scientific study proved back in 2012 –

Source

The confidential Pfizer documents also list another condition that has extreme similarities to monkeypox: autoimmune blistering disease.

The condition is hidden within the 9 pages long list of adverse events of special interest at the end of Pfizer’s reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf document.

Source

Autoimmune blistering disease causes blisters on the skin and mucous membranes throughout the body. It can affect the mouth, nose, throat, eyes, and genitals. It is not fully understood but “experts” believe that it is triggered when a person who has a genetic tendency to get this condition comes into contact with an environmental trigger. This might be a chemical or a medicine. Such as the Pfizer Covid-19 injection?

So now we know that Pfizer listed several conditions with extremely similar symptoms to monkeypox as ‘adverse events of special interest to their Covid-19 injection, it would be very helpful to know if those same conditions have actually occurred regularly in the real-world. Thankfully, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control has a very useful tool that allows us to find out.

Exhibit G – Adverse Events Reported in the U.S.A

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) hosted by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) contains historical data on adverse reactions reported against every vaccine that has been administered in the United States of America and it can be accessed here.

The following chart shows adverse events reported to VAERS related to herpes, shingles and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. It shows the number of adverse events reported against the Flu Vaccines, all vaccines combined (excluding Covid-19 injections) and the HPV/Smallpox vaccines between 2008 and 2020. As well as the number of adverse events reported against the Covid-19 injections up to 13th May 2022.

As you can see the Covid-19 injections have caused the most herpes related infections, and this is within 17 months. When comparing these to the number of flareups reported against the HPV/Smallpox vaccines in 13 years, these numbers are extremely concerning.

Many will argue that this could be completely unrelated and is just down to so many Covid-19 injections being administered. But same people who argue this also won’t provide any evidence to back it up. So we will.

According to ‘Our World in Data’, as of 6th May 2022, a total of 579.9 million Covid-19 injections had been administered across the USA.

There were over 3 times more flu jabs administered between 2008 and 2020 than Covid-19 injections administered in the USA since December 2020.

Flu Jab Source Data
Covid Jab Source Data

Now that we know these figures we can use them to work out the rate of adverse events related to herpes etc. per 1 million doses administered. We just have to perform the following calculation –

Number of doses administered / 1 million = Y
Number of Adverse Events / Y = Rate of adverse events per 1 million doses

The following chart reveals the answer to that calculation –

The rate of herpes-related infections reported as adverse reactions to the Flu jabs is 0.75 adverse events per 1 million doses administered. But the rate of herpes-related infections reported as adverse reactions to the Covid-19 injections is 31.31 adverse events per 1 million doses administered.

That’s a 4,075% difference, and indicative of a very serious problem. But what mechanism of Covid-19 vaccination is causing this to happen?

The answer lies in the fact that the Covid-19 injections may cause recipients to develop Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome.

Exhibit H – The AIDS connection

It’s a common misconception that Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is only caused by the HIV virus. This simply isn’t true.

Acquired (or secondary) immunodeficiency is one of the major causes of infections in adults. These immunodeficiency disorders affect your immune system partially or as a whole, making your body an easy target for several diseases and infections. (Source)

When immunodeficiency disorders affect your immune system, your body can no longer fight bacteria and diseases. (Source)

Several factors in the environment can cause secondary immunodeficiency disorders. (Source)

Some common ones are:

  • Radiation or chemotherapy, which can lead to a secondary immunodeficiency disorder known as neutropenia

  • Infections due to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) can result in acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)

  • Leukaemia, a cancer that begins in the cells of the bone marrow that can lead to hypogammaglobulinemia—a type of secondary immunodeficiency

  • Malnutrition, which affects up to 50% of populations in underdeveloped countries and leaves people vulnerable to respiratory infections and diarrhoea

But some of the less common causes include Drugs or medications. (Source)

So it’s perfectly possible for a medication or drug to cause acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, and official Government data strongly suggests the Covid-19 injections should be added to the list.

The following chart shows the percentage of all of the above AIDS-associated adverse reactions reported to VAERS to all vaccines by year –

Fifty-one-percent of all adverse reactions associated with AIDS reported since the year 2000 were reported in 2021, and a further 16% have been reported in 2022 so far.

The following chart shows the number of acquired immune disorders, including AIDS, that have been reported to VAERS as adverse reactions to all vaccines (including the Covid-19 jabs) by the year reported, and the Covid-19 vaccines only by the year reported –

The total number of acquired immune disorders reported as adverse reactions in 2021 represents a 1145% increase on the yearly average all the way back to the year 2000.

The following chart shows the Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness among the triple vaccinated population in England according to data found in the UK Health Security Agency’s Week 3Week 7 and Week 13 COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance reports of 2022 –

As you can see from the above, by the beginning of 2022, things were significantly worse than they were in October in terms of effectiveness; and disastrously worse by the end of March.

Data shows that vaccine effectiveness fell month on month, with the lowest effectiveness recorded among 60-69-year-olds at a shocking minus-391%. This age group also experienced the sharpest decline, falling from minus-104.69% in week 3.

But one of the more concerning declines in vaccine effectiveness has been recorded among 18-29-year-olds, falling to minus-231% by Week 12 of 2022 from +10.19% in Week 3.

A negative vaccine effectiveness indicates immune system damage because vaccine effectiveness isn’t really a measure of the effectiveness of a vaccine. It is a measure of a vaccine recipient’s immune system performance compared to the immune system performance of an unvaccinated person.

The following chart shows the immune system performance of the triple vaccinated population in England by age group in the same four week periods, compared to the natural immune system of the unvaccinated population –

By the end of March 2022, the lowest immune system performance was among 60-69-year-olds at a shocking minus-80%, but all triple vaccinated people aged 30 to 59 were not far behind, with an immune system performance ranging from minus-75% to minus-76%.

Even the 18 to 29-year-olds were within this region at minus-70%, falling from an immune system performance of +11.35% between week 51 and week 2, meaning they had suffered the fastest decline in immune system performance.

This has also translated into deaths.

The following chart shows the Covid-19 death rates per 100,000 by vaccination status across England in March 2022 based on data published by the UKHSA 

The evidence strongly suggests the Covid-19 injections cause recipients to develop acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.

This is in turn leading to flare-ups of herpes infections resulting in conditions such as shingles, auto-immune blistering disease and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

The confidential Pfizer documents suggest this, the Centres for Disease Control VAERS database suggests this, Government data published around the world suggests this, and this scientific study published in October 2021 suggests this –

Source

So it’s possible authorities may be using monkeypox to either cover up these severe adverse consequences of Covid-19 vaccination, or they are using the adverse consequences to create propaganda and fear over another alleged virus to advance their agenda.

Exhibit I – The End Game

Imagine a world where everything is analysed. China initiated the concept of its Social Credit System in 2014, and it was planned to go nationwide in 2020. In the system, everyone is given a score ranging from 350 to 950 based on their monitored behaviour. Everyone starts with 1000 points. This score increases or decreases with people’s actions or behaviours.

The system can be used for individual people, but also for companies and government organisations. The private sector, including the burgeoning tech world in China, has its own non-governmental scoring systems that they implement.

The Western world is well accustomed to credit checks: data brokers such as Experian trace the timely manner in which we pay our debts, giving us a score that’s used by lenders and mortgage providers.

We also already have social-style scores, and anyone who has shopped online with eBay has a rating on shipping times and communication, while Uber drivers and passengers both rate each other; if your score falls too far, you’re out of luck.

China’s social credit system expands that idea to all aspects of life, judging citizens’ behaviour and trustworthiness. Caught jaywalking, don’t pay a court bill, play your music too loud on the train — you could lose certain rights, such as booking a flight or train ticket.

But this system isn’t going to remain unique to Chine because there is a coordinated effort worldwide to introduce a Digital Identity and Social Credit System.

Since the turn of the year, numerous countries have announced plans to expand online censorship, introduce what are in effect social credit systems, and implement digital identities whilst floating the idea of introducing national digital currencies.

Here’s a list of articles relating to just a few examples –

This very system is required to fully implement ‘The Great Reset‘, the brainchild of World Economic Forum (WEF) founder Klaus Schwab.

You’ve most likely by now heard your nation’s elected (or unelected) leader, constantly use the slogan “Build Back Better”. The slogan was originally used by the WEF as part of its aims for a post-COVID recovery. This proves the influence the World Economic Forum has when it has managed to get the leader of every Western nation to repeat and adopt the party line.

In 2019 the WEF published a blog, How keeping score can end the era of short-termism, authored by none other than their Founder and Executive Chairman – Klaus Schwab.

Schwab states: “But they [urgent matters such as global recession and the US-China trade war] should not deflect attention from even more pressing long-term challenges: achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030; delivering on the Paris climate agreement over the next 30 years; and reforming our global economic system to make it fit for the next 50 years and beyond.

“All of this assumes an end to the economic short-termism that underpins policymaking today. For that, we should develop scorecards to track our performance on these long-term priorities. To that end, I have three suggestions. First, we need to rethink GDP as our “key performance indicator” in economic policymaking. Second, we should embrace independent tracking tools for assessing progress under the Paris agreement and the SDGs. Third, we must implement “stakeholder capitalism” by introducing an environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scorecard for businesses.”

In effect, we are in the middle of a global coup where authorities will finally have ultimate control and know anything and everything about us. Through digital currency, they will be able to know what we buy and control what we are allowed to buy. Through digital identity, they will be able to hold data on everything about us in one easy to access location. And through a social credit system, they will be able to control our behaviours through rewards and punishment.

We are witnessing the implementation of a technocratic dictatorship.

What do you believe?

If you religiously watch BBC News then we don’t hold much hope that we have swayed you to realise that we’re not coincidentally witnessing the emergence of several pandemics in the space of a few years at the same time the World Health Organisation wants unprecedented powers and World Leaders alongside the World Economic Forum want to implement ‘The Great Reset’.

But if you don’t religiously watch BBC News and have an inquisitive mind then we hope that we have at least offered you food for thought about what you are being officially being told.

We’ve tried to condense the information to be as short as possible so that you didn’t lose interest, but we can assure you there is plenty more supporting evidence out there, including various articles on The Expose.

If you believe in Germ theory then the fact this alleged monkeypox virus has 50 years’ worth of mutations occurring in the space of 4 years, must have you questioning whether this alleged disease is naturally occurring or whether it has been manipulated in a lab?

But if you don’t believe in Germ theory then you must be pondering whether monkeypox is being used to hide the monumental damage done to the natural immune system by the Covid-19 injections?

That doesn’t mean to say only one of the above scenarios is what is at play here. It’s possible we could be seeing both scenarios occurring, but of course, you would need to buy into Germ theory to believe this is the case.

But whatever your thoughts are on the matter, we hope you can discuss and debate them with other readers and present your own evidence to support those thoughts. And just remember that whilst the who’s, what’s and why’s are important, preventing the Dystopian end game is what matters most here.

https://expose-news.com/2022/06/05/monkeypox-hepatitis-covid-19-public-health-has-been-hijacked/

Legal Updates (USA) Ministry of Truth Redux, Ivermectin lawsuit Robert W Malone MD, MS

Well, the last month or so spent watching the Kabuki theater of corporate media-Washington DC Uniparty machinations has certainly been “interesting”.  “Interesting” as in the curse “may you live in interesting times”.  We have seen remarkably unified and coordinated corporate media virtue signaling regarding Ukraine fall off as the underlying truths of this surrogate foreign adventure are revealed and as Biden administration polling continues to sink.  In what may be a first in recent memory, the Military-Industrial complex tail seems to have failed to wag the dog. Raytheon should probably sue Pfizer for poisoning the well.

And then we have the curious case of a surge of coordinated multichannel fearporn concerning a Monkeypox outbreak (not the first in recent US History), which was triggered by a massive gay pride Rave party in the Canary Islands (“Maspalomas Gay Pride”) that took place from May 05 to May 15, 2022. Suffice to say, this initiative also seems to be losing steam, perhaps in part due to the curiously large number of mutations found in this particular Monkeypox variant, combined with its low pathogenicity.  Various memes are springing up referencing the story of the shepherd that repeatedly cried “Wolf”.  At this point in time, the CDC and White House continue to raise the alarm, warning of community spread. However, in an unusual concession to reality, the CDC is also clearly signaling that airborne transmission of MonkeyPox is not a real threat. Of course inconvenient scientific facts have not stopped CDC mask mandates in the past. Per CNBC:

“This is not COVID,” Dr. Jennifer McQuiston, a CDC official, said.

“Respiratory spread is not the predominant worry. It is contact and intimate contact in the current outbreak setting and population.”

So, there is that to be thankful for. As my friend JP Sears likes to say in his “news” broadcasts, “Moving On…”

Then we have the US Department of Homeland Security Disinformation Governance Board (aka Ministry of Truth), a profoundly Orwellian creation within the same agency which previously defined the distribution of “mis- dis- and mal-information” by American Citizens exercising the First Amendment of the US Constitution to be an act of domestic terrorism. This sad chapter in American history was previously detailed here. The recent “temporary” demise of that twisted bureaucratic logic, proposed to be headed up by the profoundly unqualified social media songbird Nina Jankowicz (Ms.?- approved pronoun not known at publication time), was mourned by none other than Pravda on the Potomac, ergo the old media propaganda outlet previously known as The Washington Post.  Pravda deeply regrets the temporary “pause” of this “Disinformation Board”, while blaming far-right Republicans for objecting to a clear First Amendment breach by the federal bureaucracy.  For some reason, setting up and funding an office in the Department of Homeland Security designed to identify, single out and retaliate against citizens guilty of causing the general populace to become concerned about the actions of the Bureaucracy, so that such miscreants can be labeled domestic terrorists with all of the associated benefits, was not to the liking of that corporate-government propaganda outlet.  Cheeky bastards, those far-right radicals!

Unfortunately, the WaPo copy regurgitators did not get the memo that they were supposed to use the new focus group-tested label “Ultra-MAGA”, rather than “far right”, for those who think that the US Constitution should be obeyed by the Bureaucracy.  The problem being, of course, that when the Democratic party has been captured and jerked far, far from the political center of the country by the truly far left, almost everyone (including free speech advocate Elon Musk) looks far right.  Or at least the 60+% of the electorate that is not buying what the Biden regime is trying to sell them.  The solution to which Biden/Democratic party problem will apparently be found by relabeling people who believe in following the law as “Ultra-MAGA” rather than “far right”.

But like a vampire that stays alive by drinking the lifeblood of the first amendment, this monster refuses to die. This is either an attempted rebirth of the DHS initiative within the HHS, or was this bill intended to serve as the HHS partner to the DHS vampire?  Why can you never find a good wooden stake when you need it? 

During the ides of March, 2022, the Honorable Senator Christopher Murphy (D/Uniparty-CT), working together with his colleague Senator Lujan, introduced Senate Bill S.3737, the “Promoting Public Health Information Act”Why do they always name these sorts of things the opposite of what they are intended to do?  If the US Senate were to pass a truth in labeling act for their bills, this gem should be titled the “Promoting Public Health Censorship and Propaganda by Committee Act”.  These two gentlemen propose that their collective work product (that was sarcasm) be enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress, and that it be funded to the tune of 45 million (borrowed) US Dollars per year for each of fiscal years 2023 through 2027.  Working the math, 45 million x 5 years would be…  $225 million.  Now most regular people know that $225 million US Dollars will go a pretty long way to solving many different short-term problems.  For example, that sum would buy a heck of a lot of baby formula.  Or diesel fuel. Or fertilizer.  But Mr. Murphy and Mr. Lujan think that it is more important that the US Government borrows and then spends $225M on a committee tasked with “Promoting Public Health Information”.  Let’s take a moment to see how these gentlemen propose to achieve that which the CDC is already funded to do, but which apparently is unable to achieve to the satisfaction of Mr. Murphy and Mr. Lujan.  For example, just recently we learned that the CDC and HHS has spent about $1,000M on a massive media buy with an added spritzer of propaganda, coercion, defamation and social media censorship to promote vaccine uptake and mandate compliance (as revealed in response to a Blaze media Freedom of Information Act filing).

Clearly, what is needed is an additional $225M worth of more bureaucracy in the form of an advisory committee over the next five years to further the cause.  The logic apparently being that if you cannot get full compliance with the arbitrary, capricious and illegal public health mandates which HHS and the CDC attempted to impose on US Citizens since Mr. Biden swore an oath to protect the US Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, then an additional $225M worth of advice and political cover should do the trick.

So, what do they propose to purchase for $225M over five years?  Basically, a censorship and propaganda advisory committee (cleverly designed so that the Bureaucracy and Secretary HHS can avoid any blame for forthcoming recommendations), together with various experts appointed by the Bureaucracy and Secretary HHS.  Those who have watched the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices or the FDA Vaccines Advisory Committee over the past couple of years know how this game works. Frankly, as an expert in writing and reviewing Federal HHS contract proposals, I think that this will likely require far more than $45M/year. These sorts of initiatives tend to take on a self-perpetuating and ever-expanding life of their own. Read for yourself below, while keeping in mind the pretzel logic and Orwellian language distortions which we have all been unintentionally trained by HHS to recognize over the last couple of years:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Promoting Public Health Information Act”.

SEC. 2. STRENGTHENING PUBLIC HEALTH COMMUNICATION.

Section 319F of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (b), to read as follows:

“(b) Public Health Information And Communications Advisory Committee.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish an advisory committee to be known as the Public Health Information and Communications Advisory Committee (referred to in this subsection as the ‘Advisory Committee’).

“(2) DUTIES.—The Advisory Committee shall make recommendations to the Secretary and report on—

“(A) critical aspects of communication and dissemination of scientific and evidence-based public health information during public health emergencies, including—

“(i) the role and impact of misinformation on the response to such public health emergencies;

“(ii) the role of risk communication before and during such public health emergencies; and

“(iii) other relevant factors, as the Secretary determines appropriate;

“(B) information from academic institutions, community-based organizations, and other nongovernmental organizations related to evidence-based or evidence-informed strategies and best practices to effectively communicate and disseminate such information; and

“(C) strategies to improve communication and dissemination of scientific and evidence-based public health information to the public, and, as appropriate, to address misinformation during public health emergencies, including strategies to—

“(i) identify the most effective methods for the dissemination of information during a public health emergency;

“(ii) determine best practices and communicate information to populations that may be impacted by such misinformation; and

“(iii) adapt approaches for the dissemination of information, as appropriate, to address emerging trends related to misinformation.

“(3) COMPOSITION.—The Advisory Committee shall be composed of—

“(A) appropriate Federal officials, appointed by the Secretary, who shall serve as nonvoting members; and

“(B) individuals, appointed by the Secretary, with expertise in public health, medicine, communications, related technology, psychology, national security, and other areas, as the Secretary determines appropriate, who shall serve as voting members.

“(4) DISSEMINATION.—The Secretary shall review the recommendations of the Advisory Committee and, not later than 180 days after receipt of the report under paragraph (2), shall submit to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report describing any actions planned by the Secretary related to the communication and dissemination of scientific and evidence-based public health information, including addressing misinformation, as appropriate.

“(5) TERMINATION.—The Advisory Committee shall terminate 4 years after the date of enactment of the Promoting Public Health Information Act.”;

(2) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g);

(3) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:

“(f) Educational Initiatives.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall award assistance for the development of evidence-based initiatives to promote fact-based public health and medical science information to the public and educate the public on how to identify misinformation, disinformation, and credible information.

“(2) CONSULTATION.—In developing the initiatives under this subsection, the Secretary shall consult with—

“(A) the Public Health Information and Communications Advisory Committee established under subsection (b);

“(B) experts in the fields of public health and medicine, communication, technology, behavioral science, and other relevant disciplines as appropriate; and

“(C) relevant Federal agencies, as appropriate.

“(3) REQUIREMENTS.—The initiatives established under this subsection shall—

“(A) be an evidence-based or evidence-informed media and public engagement initiative that includes partnerships with national and local organizations;

“(B) ensure that official scientific and public health guidance is accessible and communicated effectively to the public with specific focus on populations that are underserved or with low health literacy; and

“(C) ensure that activities are tailored towards subgroups that are being targeted for health misinformation and disinformation, or are especially susceptible to health misinformation and disinformation, in a culturally and linguistically appropriate manner.”; and

(4) by adding at the end of subsection (g), as so redesignated, the following:

“(3) FUNDING FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES.—There are authorized to be appropriated $45,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2023 through 2027 for purposes of carrying out subsections (b) and (f).”.

After reading this, all I can say is “buyer beware”.  Please call up your Senators and Congressional representatives and let them know what you think of this piece of work. 

As for myself, I think that Senate Bill S.3737 deserves a quick trip to the dustbin of history, and Senators Murphy and Lujan should be reminded during their next election cycle they have also sworn to defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and should heed that oath. 

As for Senators Murphy and Lujan, they would be well served to remember that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Their little $225M five-year committee could easily become weaponized against them (and the hidden sponsors of this bill whose interests they serve) if and when the opposition gains the upper hand.  Sometimes legislative discretion can be the better part of valor.  They should just say “no”, while reminding their disappointed masters of this wisdom. Just think, by dropping this proposal, they could claim to have saved federal taxpayers (in other words you and me) $225M + interest!  Sounds like a win-win to me.

PRESS RELEASE:

Doctors Sue FDA Over Unlawful Attempts to Prohibit Ivermectin Use 

For Immediate Release: June 2, 2022 

Galveston, TX – Today, a group of doctors filed a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra in his official capacity as Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Food and Drug Administration, and Robert M. Califf in his official capacity as Commissioner of Food and Drugs, over the FDA’s unlawful attempts to prohibit the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19. 

The plaintiffs, Drs. Robert L. Apter, Mary Talley Bowden, and Paul E. Marik argue the FDA acted outside of its authority and illegally interfered with their ability to practice medicine by directing the public, including health professionals and patients, to not use ivermectin, a drug that has received full FDA approval for human use. 

Dr. Mary Bowden responded to today’s filing, stating:

“Since the pandemic began, I have had one mission - help my patients. I provided access to testing when testing was hard to find. I provided treatment when other doctors told my patients to stay home. I have kept over 3,900 patients out of the hospital, but it hasn’t been easy. Sadly, fighting the system has been a much bigger challenge than fighting the disease. Despite my excellent track record treating COVID patients, the FDA’s smear campaign against ivermectin continues to be a daily hurdle to overcome. I am fighting back - the public needs to understand what the FDA has done is illegal, and I hope this suit will prevent them from continuing to interfere in the doctor-patient relationship.” 

“If doctors are freed to treat patients according to their best judgment and unprejudiced evaluation of the medical literature, many thousands more deaths and serious disabilities will be averted,” said Dr. Robert Apter. “Pronouncements from the FDA against the use of ivermectin have been the basis for disciplinary actions against doctors, interfere with the doctor-patient relationship, and have had a severe chilling effect on the use of life-saving medication for a deadly disease.” 

Dr. Paul Marik commented

“The FDA’s public statements on ivermectin have been misleading and raised unwarranted concern over a critical drug in preventing and treating COVID-19. The agency felt compelled to use language to discourage any discourse and interest in using ivermectin as a front-line treatment of COVID-19. To do this is to ignore both statutory limits on the FDA’s authority and the significant body of scientific evidence from peer-reviewed research, over 80 medical trials, and results from ivermectin’s use in medical settings worldwide, showing the safe and effective use of the drug in fighting COVID-19,”

The full complaint can be viewed here

Who is Robert Malone is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/legal-updates-usa?s=r

Prominent Early Treatment Ivermectin Doctors Sue FDA & HHS

Prominent front line critical care doctors have sued the federal government, including both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), due to the latter’s effort to impede the use of ivermectin via a myriad of strategies and tactics from a sort of information warfare to threatening physicians livelihoods indirectly by communicating with licensing bodies that doctors should face reprimand, including the loss of license for engaging in any activity that includes the promulgation of misinformation. Filed in the U.S. Southern District of Texas in Galveston, plaintiffs include Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, Paul E. Marik, and Robert L. Apter.

As well-known proponents of early treatment and use of FDA-approved, off-label therapies to treat COVID-19, the plaintiffs argue that the FDA’s information warfare, including the use of social media to convey that ivermectin was a dangerous drug for human consumption, led to a purge of ivermectin-prescribing doctors as physician-licensing bodies started policing their members across many states.

The plaintiffs declare in the complaint that the FDA’s activity was outrageous, negligent, and outside of its mandated authority as federal bureaucrats. They claim the FDA illegally meddled with doctor and patient relationships to stop the use of ivermectin.

In a recent press conference, the Ear, Nose, and Throat specialist Dr. Bowden, who resides in Texas, declared that her early treatment intervention was responsible for keeping at least 3,900 COVID-19 patients out of the hospital thanks to the use of ivermectin and other complementary treatments. 

TrialSite has reported some states such as Tennessee have recently passed laws allowing consumers to access ivermectin via a standing order at the pharmacy. But most states have shut down ivermectin access. Ivermectin subscriptions totaled about 3,000 per week before the pandemic and, according to one study, skyrocketed to nearly 90,000 per week during the height of the pandemic last year. A combination of FDA proactive pressure and disapproval of use by the leadership of academic medical centers, health systems, medical societies, and other stakeholders in organized medicine has led to a dramatic reduction in access to ivermectin as an off-label regiment for COVID-19.

Follow the link to read the lawsuit at the website of Boyden Gray & Associates. 

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/prominent-early-treatment-ivermectin-doctors-sue-fda-hhs-7162f7de

2022 Bilderbergers Include Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla & GSK’s Emma Walmsley but Lacks Healthcare Priority Despite Ongoing Pandemic

A group of prominent societal members from heads of state, corporations, media, and consultancies converge in Washington DC over the next few days to discuss common concerns among what has traditionally been considered the West, including America and Western Europe. Called the Bilderberg Group, the annual Bilderberg Meeting was canceled the past two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Activated again, out of the entire group of 119 participants only three leaders are from the healthcare sector. Those from healthcare include two Big Pharma CEOs and the Minister of Health and Social Affairs for Sweden. Who are the invited pharmaceutical heads? They include CEOs of Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline, Albert Bourla and Emma Walmsley.

With the meeting running in Washington DC from June 2-5 one would think that healthcare and post-pandemic realities would be a prioritized topic, but that doesn’t seem to be the case at all based on the dearth of healthcare sector participants. Interestingly, a review of Bilderberg Meeting agendas over the past decade reveals healthcare was never a topic among these prominent gatherings.

What is the Bilderberg Group?

Few people actually know of the Bilderberg Group, a list of top executives, bureaucrats, and governing officials from the West. The history of these meetings goes back to 1954, when the first conference occurred at the Bilderberg Hotel (Hotel de Bilderberg) in Osterbeek, Netherlands. This was actually a smart branding tool for the family-run hotel chain at the time—one that owned 12 hotels across Netherlands and Germany.

According to “The Hotel de Bilderberg, HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands: An authorized biography” authored by Alden Hatch in 1962, the impetus for the group’s genesis was growing anti-American (pro-communist) sentiment in Western Europe at the time. With Cold War divisions intensifying, prominent figures in Western Europe were concerned about the creep of communism threatening Europe’s participation in the booming American consumer-driven capitalism occurring across the “pond.”

According to Hatch, several key players’ moves led to the first Bilderberg session, including Paul Rijkens, a former head of large consumer goods corporation Unilever, Paul van Zeeland, ex-Belgian Prime Minister, Jozef Retinger, an exiled Polish politician, and Prince Bernhard, a German nobleman who married into Dutch royalty (married Queen Juliana of the Netherlands). They represented a cohort of concerned prominent figures on the edge in a very different Europe. With Soviet expansion and tectonic ideological shifts, keeping powerful social, cultural, and economic alignment with the American economy and society was of paramount concern among the prestigious members of Western Europe’s upper crust.  

The meeting emerged at a time of a booming consumer-driven American economy while the growing aforementioned ideological tensions in Europe threatened the mandates of the Marshall Plan, the American-led initiative to rebuild Germany and Europe after World War II.

The meeting emerged as a platform for prominent members of the West (predominantly the United States and Western Europe—e.g., UK, Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, etc.) to support an emerging “Atlanticism,” or a geopolitical order conducive to the cultures, morals, and norms of what emerged as a new world power configuration after the war.

Meeting in a more informal, private setting, with no media present, prominent members from governments, corporations, financial institutions share and discuss common social, political, and economic concerns including defense.

The elite status of the participants along with secretive nature of the meetings over the years have raised lots of suspicions, with allegations of a front for elites to plan and manage the New World Order committed to global domination. Anglo press, however, suggests it’s more of a “supper club.” 

Bilderbergers did not meet during the past two years. The last time they met was in 2019, in Montreux, Switzerland. Based on their shared public agenda—TrialSite didn’t get an invitation—included at the top of the list was the topic “Stable Strategic Order” followed by “What’s Next for Europe,” and “Climate Change and Sustainability.” Both China and Russia feature prominently next on the list followed by “The Future of Capitalism.” A review of past agendas found healthcare was never a topic, interestingly enough, given the prominence of the topic.

Then the pandemic hit with the whole world going through the worst public health crisis in a century. The 2020 and 2021 meetings were cancelled. Strangely, their 2022 published agenda doesn’t prioritize the topic.

2022 Meeting

Apparently, elites are ready to move on from COVID-19. Even though the pandemic is ongoing with surges of infections around the world, coupled with persisting emergency orders, meeting attendees are primarily concerned with other matters. According to the Bilderberg prioritized meeting agenda, the top concerns include 1) Geopolitical Realignments, 2) NATO Challenges, 3) China, 4) Indo-Pacific Realignment, and 5) Sino-US Tech Competition.

Russia falls to #6, post-pandemic health at #11, and Ukraine dead last at #14!

The Bilderberg Meeting agenda

1. Geopolitical Realignments
2. NATO Challenges
3. China
4. Indo-Pacific Realignment
5. Sino-US Tech Competition
6. Russia
7. Continuity of Government and the Economy
8. Disruption of the Global Financial System
9. Disinformation
10. Energy Security and Sustainability
11. Post Pandemic Health
12. Fragmentation of Democratic Societies
13. Trade and Deglobalization
14. Ukraine

Bilderberg shares more information here.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/2022-bilderbergers-include-pfizers-ceo-albert-bourla-gsks-emma-walmsley-but-lacks-healthcare-priority-despite-ongoing-pandemic-1524c9b2

Norwegian Government is Collecting Details of Personal Supermarket Purchases Through Bank Card Transactions BY RHODA WILSON

Norway is a leading country when it comes to digital ID. It is already an almost “must” to be able to live life: for online banking and many other things, wrote Swedish journalist Peter Imanuelsen.  Now Norwegian authorities want even more control over citizens. The Norwegian State Statistics Bureau (“SSB”) already knows where people live and their income and now, they also want to monitor Norwegians’ grocery store purchases. They want to know every single food item that consumers buy.

SSB, or Statistics Norway, has stated that data containing information on payment transactions from and including 1 January 2022 must be submitted by Nets. “Technical solution and frequency of transfers are specified in more detail in dialogue with Nets, with a requirement for monthly deliveries as a minimum.”

In early 2019, Nets, a market leader in the European payments industry, expanded contracts with Eika Gruppen, a strategic alliance of 69 Norwegian banks, and DNB, Norway’s largest bank.  Today, Nets processes 8 out of 10 in-store payments.  The SSB requires that Nets share detailed information on all transactions with authorities.

Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE


Follow The Exposé’s official Channel on Telegram here
Join the conversation in our Telegram Discussion Group here

Statistics Norway has published consumption statistics since 1958. “The purpose of the statistics is to provide a detailed picture of Norwegian households’ annual consumption of goods and services … For many years, the Norwegian Directorate of Health has used figures from the Consumption Survey to calculate the development of the Norwegian diet … Until 2012, data on household consumption were collected through sample surveys … A study of previously received test data from Nets shows that payment transactions can be used to improve the quality of statistics in several areas … Transaction data from Nets is highlighted as an important data source.” SSB said.

Other reasons stated by the SSB for tracking Nets payments are:

  • a far better knowledge base on developments in the Norwegian diet with higher quality and level of detail than before;

  • as a data source for business cycle statistics for the business sector; and,

  • for more comprehensive statistics on who uses private health services and the costs.

SSB: Collection of payment transactions via BankAxept from Nets Branch Norway, 6 May 2022

In the same article from which the image above was taken, published on 6 May, the SSB stated (translation to English using Google):

The benefit is related to the fact that BankAxept transactions from Nets can be utilised as a new source in various official statistics that Statistics Norway produces and thus contribute to improving quality and timeliness in the production of statistics.

Description of data that respondents must report – Information corresponding to what Nets delivered in 2021 must be reported with data from 2018. It includes the following fields that have relevant information related to completed payment transactions via BankAxept: transaction date, transaction type status, card service, user site number, username, [Bank] Account no, item purchase amount, total amount.

Nets has expressed that it will require a lot of resources to make a sample-specific extract of payment transactions from their systems, as the systems are to a small extent adapted to this. After reviewing various alternatives, Nets, in collaboration with Statistics Norway, has decided that the best solution is to extract all transaction data for a given period.

Payment transactions from Nets contain the ID of the cardholder in the form of an account number. This information is unique and personally identifiable. In order to meet the statistical needs of the consumption statistics and the diet statistics, there will also be a need to compare payment transactions from Nets with other personally identifiable information.

Statistics Norway will link the payment transactions from Nets to receipts for purchases in the large grocery chains in Norway. As of today, Statistics Norway collects receipt data from the four largest grocery chains. A link between a payment transaction made with a debit card and a grocery receipt enables Statistics Norway to link a payment transaction and receipt for just over 70 per cent of grocery purchases.

Collection of payment transactions via BankAxept from Nets Branch Norway, Statistics Norway, 6 May 2022

“So, imagine that! Norway is going to connect payment details done with card payments and grocery store receipts to figure out exactly what kind of food people are buying, and who is buying it. In other words, Norway will track exactly what kind of food citizens are buying. We are talking about a new level of state control here,” Imanuelsen wrote.

Not only is the state collecting data on all card transactions and pairing them with receipts from stores to monitor what exactly consumers buy, but they will also keep the data indefinitely.

As reported by NRK, Statistics Norway stated that it will be obtaining 2.4 million receipts daily and 1.6 billion transactions annually. The data will “in principle” not be deleted.

Some grocery stores are considering appealing the decision made by Norway Statistics.

We will appeal the decision and in parallel ask for guidance from the Norwegian Data Protection Authority, Executive Vice President Truls Fjeldstad of food retailer NorgesGruppen, the decision is “so intrusive towards our customers’ personal information that we cannot follow this without consulting the Data Inspectorate.”

And Coop Communications Manager Harald Kristiansen has said that Coop is considering appealing the decision.

The Data Inspectorate told NRK that they had received an inquiry to look into the case and that it is currently too early to say anything more about further proceedings.

Read more: Statistics Norway demands to know exactly what Norwegians buy in the grocery store, NRK, 28 May 2022

https://expose-news.com/2022/06/04/norway-gov-collecting-details-of-personal-purchases/