Reprinted from Trial Site News - NIAID Continues Potentially Dangerous Gain-of-Function Research During Pandemic—Lies, Obfuscates and Gaslights Congressional Investigation--Now Busted

The Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Republican Members (E&C or the Committee) investigated ongoing research involving MPXV, a virus that causes mpox (formerly known as “monkeypox”), planned and/or conducted at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). E&C is the committee with jurisdiction over public health agencies per Rule X clause 1(f) of the U.S. House of Representatives, including NIAID’s parent agency, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and any other federal biomedical research. The Committee has a long history of conducting oversight of federally funded virology research, including investigating accidents at high-containment laboratories, and examining federal policies related to biosecurity, biosafety, and potentially risky experiments. Note that in the U.S. House of Representatives, “Interim Staff Report on Investigation into Risky MPXV Experiment at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases” such investigations have turned up a host of egregious, outrageous occurrences. Referring to a September 15, 2022 report in Science Magazine about MPXV, Dr. Bernard Moss, a notable pox virologist working for decades at NIAID reports swapping dozens of genes from the much more transmissible, but less deadly, clade II MPXV into the more deadly clade I MPXV. Apparently, the Moss team was “planning to try the opposite, endowing clade II virus with genes from its deadlier relative.” This represents gain-of-function research with a potentially dangerous pathogen and as will be demonstrated in the report for which this article introduces, what has ensued since the E&C investigation, representing the legislative branch of the U.S. government and hence the people, has bordered on or in fact represents criminality.

The proposal to transfer genes from the deadlier clade I into the more transmissible clade II alarmed some scientists who believed a more potent version of the mpox outbreak strain could spark an epidemic that would be substantially more lethal.

Not surprisingly, given that it occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, oversight requests were made to the NIH. E&C wanted to have a better understanding of the potential risks and benefits of the experiment Dr. Moss had described in the Science magazine interview, in particular the proposal to transfer genes from clade I into clade II.

Clearly, this class of experiment fell into the gain-of-function research of concern (GOFROC) and given the high likelihood that SARS-COV-2 was also manipulated in laboratories and subsequently leaked out, the imperative to learn more was more than rational.

The disclosure of the research in Science Magazine also appeared to implicate federal policies or practices regarding dual-use research of concern (DURC) by utilizing gene transferring techniques that, if misapplied, pose a significant threat to public health and human safety.

A Culture of Cover-Up

What commenced over the past eighteen months was utterly unacceptable.

For 18 months, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the NIH, and NIAID according to E&C “repeatedly obstructed and misled the Committee about whether the transfer of genes from clade I into clade II experiments described by Dr. Moss in the Science article had been approved or conducted.”

First, just outright refusing to answer questions by Republican members of EC, much like investigations into COVID-19 “HHS also refused to provide most of the requested documents to the Committee unless they had already been made public.”

More documentation was ultimately made available but always under the most trying of conditions. HHS and NIH had to be essentially in a corner, opting to share documentation on premises under camera instead of answering subpoenas or transcribed interviews.

Ultimately, HHS and NIH conducted a series of gaslighting exercises to downplay the current research, declaring that such research was designed to avoid more dangerous classes of GOFROC. The federal government via HHS and NIH even “forced science to issue clarification for one article on the experiment.”

HHS Lies to Elected Officials

In the E&C report, the authors declare that HHS repeatedly asserted that it was not funding GOFROC via the transfer of clad I material into clade II virus experiment. Of course, according to the E&C report, this was an outright lie. 

How do they know? Because E&C were able to access original documentation showing that these experiments were approved for funding by NIH’s Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC)on June 30, 2015. A full seven years prior to the Committee asking HHS/NIAID for information about the MPXV experiments.

Apparently, initial requirements for safety and even adhering to compliance were lax. It was only after a 2018 IBC review that more rigorous requirements were put in place for GOFROC.

Finally, Some Honesty…But

How did the HHS come clean? According to the E&C report in a letter dated March 19, 2024, HHS Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs Melanie Egorin admitted that “research involving bi-directional transfer of genes between clades I and II of the MPXV was considered and approved.” Importantly, and context is necessary, this admission only was made after a great pressure was applied by E&C –after threat of subpoena ultimately compelled HHS and NIH to share the documents related to the risk experiments to a team via in camera.

This breakthrough of an executive branch agency bureaucrat finally acknowledging what was essentially already published for all to review and understand in plain sight occurred only after a “deliberate, prolonged effort to deceive the Committee '' even suggesting criminal behavior on the part of executive branch officials and employees. In fact, to this day, the culture of lying, obfuscation and gaslighting mastered by Dr. Anthony Fauci continues on in that officials at these executive branch agencies continue to deny the existence of the GOFROC despite the evidence of approval for eight years now.

The Culprit

The Committee goes on the record in this report as to the need for “additional evidence from HHS, the NIH, or NIAID to have confidence that the experiment did not occur.”

Inadvertence or mistake aside, “the deceptive conduct suggests that HHS, the NIH, and particularly NIAID, may have knowingly and deliberately misled the Committee regarding potentially dangerous intramural GOFROC/DURC research.”

 Even if the experiment never did occur E&C notes that all of the obstruction, misrepresentations and gaslighting activity associated with the topic suggests “the lengths to which NIAID will go to evade outside oversight just for the sake of evasion.”

The Committee centers its investigational powers now on NIAID as that is the agency that “bears the most responsibility for misleading the Committee.” This is especially so given NIH’s “decentralized structure where the research institutes have a large degree of autonomy in setting research priorities and managing grants, including approval and oversight of biosafety measures.”

Conclusion

The Committee based on this E&C-driven investigation, comes to the primary conclusion that NIAID cannot be trusted to oversee its own research of pathogens responsibly. It cannot be trusted to determine whether an experiment on a potential pandemic pathogen or enhanced potential pandemic pathogen poses unacceptable biosafety risk or a serious public health threat.”

And perhaps most important goes to the core underpinnings of the American experiment—its balance of powers in its constitutional government. That is that NIAID, an executive branch agency made possible, funded by the legislative branch, cannot be trusted to honestly communicate with said legislative branch (Congress) nor the public, for which the former represent when it comes to  controversial and potentially dangerous GOFROC experiments. TrialSite suggests what this really represents is a breakdown in what the Founding Fathers intended for our form of government.  Special interests in the form of industry and other financial interests for example infuse executive branch agencies, turning them against the representatives of the people, the core to all democratic forms of government.

All of this is highly relevant given that the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) recently issued updated policy and related guidance on DURC and Gain-of-Function (GOF) research.

Why? According to the Committee, “This updated policy replaced the earlier OSTP Recommended Policy Guidance for Departmental Development of Review Mechanisms for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight and the HHS Framework for Guiding Funding Decisions about Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (collectively hereinafter referred to as “P3CO”) imposed in 2017.”

Under the new OSTP policy, the funding agencies such as NIAID maintain primary responsibility for oversight of GOFROC and DURC experiments involving potentially dangerous pathogens.

Both the 2017 policy as well as the updated 2024 policy call for the agency conducting the experiments to serve as overseer and regulator.

But E&C correctly identifies, “In almost any other scientific field or industry, this arrangement would be immediately recognized as a conflict of interest, necessitating independent review and oversight.”

Call to Action: Follow the link to read the entire report.  

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/niaid-continues-potentially-dangerous-gain-of-function-research-during-pandemiclies-obfuscates-and-gaslights-congressional-investigation-now-busted-fc21e676

Reprinted from THE EPOCH TIMES - BBC Presenter Dies After Suffering Blood Clots Following AstraZeneca Jab

By Alexander Zhang

An award-winning BBC radio presenter died last week after suffering blood clots following vaccination with the AstraZeneca COVID-19 jab, her family has revealed.

Lisa Shaw, who worked for BBC Newcastle, developed “severe” headaches a week after having the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus vaccine, and fell seriously ill a few days later, her family said on Thursday in a statement.

The 44-year-old mother-of-one was treated in intensive care for blood clots and bleeding, but died on May 21 at the Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle.

“We are devastated and there is a Lisa-shaped hole in our lives that can never be filled,” her family said. “We will love and miss her always.”

Shaw previously worked in commercial radio and won a Sony Gold Award in 2012 for the breakfast show she hosted on Real Radio with co-host Gary Philipson.

Her cause of death is still under investigation, but a coroner issued an interim fact-of-death certificate which lists a “complication of AstraZeneca COVID-19 virus vaccination” as a consideration.

Vials labelled "AstraZeneca COVID-19 Coronavirus Vaccine" and a syringe are seen in front of a displayed AstraZeneca logo in this illustration, on March 10, 2021. (Dado Ruvic/Reuters, Illustration/File Photo)

The UK’s medicines regulator, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which approved the vaccine, expressed condolences.

“We are saddened to hear about the death of Lisa Shaw and our thoughts are with her family,” said an MHRA spokesperson.

“As with any serious suspected adverse reaction, reports with a fatal outcome are fully evaluated by the MHRA, including an assessment of post-mortem details if available.

“Our detailed and rigorous review into reports of blood clots occurring together with thrombocytopenia is ongoing.”

According to MHRA’s latest report on vaccine side-effects, by May 19, 58 people have died in the UK after developing blood clots following the AstraZeneca jab.

MHRA reported 332 cases of blood clots events with concurrent low platelet counts following the jab. These events occurred in 180 women and 151 men aged from 18 to 93 years.

There has been scrutiny of the AstraZeneca vaccine on the issue of blood clots, with a higher incidence in younger people.

To prevent cases of blood clots, people under 40 in the UK are being offered an alternative to the AstraZeneca vaccine.

But the British government has repeatedly stressed that the benefits of the AstraZeneca vaccine continue to outweigh risks for most people.

According to MHRA estimates, by 19 May, 24.2 million people in the UK had received the first doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine, and 10.7 million had got their second doses.

PA contributed to this report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/bbc-presenter-dies-after-suffering-blood-clots-following-astrazeneca-jab-3834673

Reprinted from Forbidden News - World Council for Health Calling for a Complete Moratorium on Childhood Vaccines TOO LATE: GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS ARE ALREADY BRAIN-DAMAGED BY DESIGN

TRANSCRIPT

Dr Peter McCullough: What we've learned is this childhood vaccine schedule is not what we thought. And now, critically looking at it, we have a situation that we just learned that the World Council for Health, now international body, is calling for a complete moratorium on childhood vaccines. First international organization to call for that.

Why? Because the vaccines are piling up one after another. They're being given in multiple salvos. There are safety events, now that we learned.

In 1986, the US passed legislation that indemnified the manufacturers of vaccines. In that legislation, it says the vaccines have unavoidable harm. It says that.

So what are the harms that we're seeing? It's clear when the vaccines are given in multiple rounds, it's probably not no single vaccine and no single additive, but it's the sum total of vaccines given at once.

We're seeing a strong signal towards neuropsychiatric disorders. So, Attention Deficit Disorder, Asperger's, Autism, seizures, allergic diseases, asthma, atopic dermatitis.

Show Host: And even death.

Dr Peter McCullough: Need for termination, sudden infant death syndrome.

And then the converse now, this is the converse, which is papers by Mawson, Hooker, Miller, Thomas, and an older Amish study. All five studies show if children go natural, no vaccines whatsoever, they have the best outcomes.

Freedom from these things. And you know, when I was a kid, the rate of autism was one in 10,000. Now it's one in 36. And there's about 200 published manuscripts showing it's a immune system dysregulation.

Show Host: One in 36? One in 36.

Dr. Peter McCullough: One in 36.

The immune system dysregulation that, you know, in a iactrogenic phase of the vaccine, sometimes with a febrile seizure, the inflammatory factors go into the brain, probably permanently change it. And the vignettes, the mothers tell us that the child was fine up until the time they took a multiple rounds of vaccines. And then they developed autism.

Those vignettes are almost certainly correct. We can't pin it down to any single vaccine, but I'm telling you in total, it doesn't look good.

This epidemic of autism is a tsunami. And you know now, many, many mothers now, recent Kaiser Family Foundation survey shows, about a third of mothers and young fathers – going natural.

Reprinted from Bailiwick News - On US-FDA worldwide non-regulation of Covid-19 vaccines construed as gene therapies. Comment posted to Julian Gillespie's Substack.

By KATHERINE WATT

Orientation for new readers - American Domestic Bioterrorism Program - Tools for dismantling kill box anti-law

Julian Gillespie, writing at Substack:

In my view, the GMO aspect is moot for several reasons, that can be summed up as: there are no legal requirements that FDA do anything at all substantively related to biological product regulation. 

1. Under PREP and EUA law, during declared ‘public health emergency,’ in effect since 2020, FDA has no legal obligation to apply or enforce cGMP or any other rules governing product safety and efficacy during development, testing, manufacture, distribution and use, and no legal obligations to provide truthful information to the public.

FDA’s function is to simulate/falsify regulatory oversight, not to conduct true regulatory oversight, so as to get intentionally-toxic products into as many people as possible, as often as possible, while deceiving recipients into believing the products are regulated.

2. Under US biological product regulation law generally (non-emergency conditions in effect since 1944), FDA has no legal obligation to apply or enforce cGMP or other drug development, manufacturing and use laws, to any biological products, including all vaccines, and including all “GMO” products.

Again, FDA’s function is simply to simulate regulatory oversight, not to actually regulate products, so as to get intentionally-toxic products into as many people as possible, as often as possible, while deceiving recipients into believing the products are regulated.

3. Under Mutual Recognition Agreements, regulators in Australia, EU, and other participating countries are relieved of all regulatory obligations they would otherwise have, and are authorized to accept as true, the assertions of fake US-FDA regulators, who are themselves authorized to accept as true, the unsupported claims of the manufacturers, so as to get intentionally toxic products into as many people as possible, as often as possible, while deceiving recipients into believing the products are regulated.

Some documents:

Related:

  • March 8, 2024 - Regulatory simulations at home and abroad: Mutual Recognition Agreements. Part 1 of series on legal links connecting domestic and international non-regulation of non-medicines.

  • March 24, 2024 - Vaccines have always been heterogeneous mixtures of toxins used to intentionally sicken people and animals. Public health and regulatory systems have consistently hidden those truths behind false claims about effects of vaccines; legalized non-regulation of biological product manufacturing. (Part 4 of series) - “…When signed and ratified by national governments, MRAs authorize national regulators — including drug regulators — to be "relieved of" their regulatory obligations and instead, recognize and rely on the regulatory decisions of other countries' regulators, especially the US Food and Drug Administration. The two systems interlock.

    Under the legal terms of MRA treaties, US-FDA can be legally construed as the sole regulator for worldwide drug manufacturing and distribution systems. Under the legal terms of the US-FDA drug regulation system, all biological product manufacturing can be legally conducted with no substantive disclosure, monitoring or enforcement of rules controlling purity, sterility, safety, potency, efficacy, raw materials, manufacturing processes, or chemical and biological composition of finished, packaged, distributed products…”

  • June 13, 2024 - Parsing "Yay, we did it!" informational misdirection campaigns. “…International Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs) absolve federal drug regulators of non-US countries of legal responsibility for cGMP manufacturing regulation, transferring regulatory functions to US-FDA [serving as] global drug non-regulator under US laws exempting biological products, vaccines and EUA countermeasures from cGMP compliance…”

https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/on-us-fda-worldwide-non-regulation?publication_id=37889&post_id=145762650&isFreemail=true&r=16ettj&triedRedirect=true

Reprinted from The Kingston Report - PFIZER Charged with CONSPIRACY to Commit Fraud and Unconscionable Acts

BREAKING: Kansas AG Kobach charged Pfizer with Conspiring with the US Government, Universities, BIO, and the Media to Commit Unconscionable Acts and Defraud Kansas Residents

KAREN KINGSTON

June 18, 2024: Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach brought 9 Counts against Pfizer under the Kansas Consumer Protection Act for 1 Count of Civil Conspiracy for conspiring with the Media, Universities, the lobbying group BIO, and the US government, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS*), in order to generate billions of dollars in revenue by willfully concealing material evidence and misrepresenting the fraudulent safety and efficacy claims of Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA injections to Kansas residents.

*Note: The agencies within HHS include the FDA, CDC, and NIH.

In related news, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that Americans have the right to challenge the government claim that mRNA injections are 'safe and effective vaccines' and to seek compensatory damages in court; and Texas is suing the pants off of Pfizer.

Conspiracy to Commit a Crime Is NOT Protected by the PREP or PAHPRA Act

I’m truly sorry that many Health Freedom supporters have been gaslit into believing that conspiracy to commit a crime is protected by US laws, such as the PREP and PAHPRA act.

In the lawsuit, AG Kobach correctly points out that after Pfizer received their FDA-approval on August 23, 2021, the pharma giant and HHS were legally obligated to disclose all clinical trial data, as well as adverse events reported to Pfizer and the government agencies.

This not only includes Pfizer’s internal databases and the CDC’s VAERS and V-SAFE data, but also data from the US Government BEST database, which includes Medicare and insurance claims of injuries, diseases, and deaths that occurred post-vaccination.

The FDA’s Role is To Protect the Americans’ Health, NOT Pfizer’s Stock Price

The lawsuit also accurately points out that the role of government regulators is to protect the health of their populations not to enrich global pharmaceutical companies.

https://karenkingston.substack.com/p/pfizer-charged-with-conspiracy-to?publication_id=1103773&post_id=145746480&isFreemail=true&r=16ettj&triedRedirect=true

Reprinted from FORBIDDEN NEWS - World Council for Health Calling for a Complete Moratorium on Childhood Vaccines TOO LATE: GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS ARE ALREADY BRAIN-DAMAGED BY DESIGN FORBIDDEN.NEWS

Dr Peter McCullough: What we've learned is this childhood vaccine schedule is not what we thought. And now, critically looking at it, we have a situation that we just learned that the World Council for Health, now international body, is calling for a complete moratorium on childhood vaccines. First international organization to call for that.

Why? Because the vaccines are piling up one after another. They're being given in multiple salvos. There are safety events, now that we learned.

In 1986, the US passed legislation that indemnified the manufacturers of vaccines. In that legislation, it says the vaccines have unavoidable harm. It says that.

So what are the harms that we're seeing? It's clear when the vaccines are given in multiple rounds, it's probably not no single vaccine and no single additive, but it's the sum total of vaccines given at once.

We're seeing a strong signal towards neuropsychiatric disorders. So, Attention Deficit Disorder, Asperger's, Autism, seizures, allergic diseases, asthma, atopic dermatitis.

And then the converse now, this is the converse, which is papers by Mawson, Hooker, Miller, Thomas, and an older Amish study. All five studies show if children go natural, no vaccines whatsoever, they have the best outcomes.

Freedom from these things. And you know, when I was a kid, the rate of autism was one in 10,000. Now it's one in 36. And there's about 200 published manuscripts showing it's a immune system dysregulation.

The immune system dysregulation that, you know, in a iactrogenic phase of the vaccine, sometimes with a febrile seizure, the inflammatory factors go into the brain, probably permanently change it. And the vignettes, the mothers tell us that the child was fine up until the time they took a multiple rounds of vaccines. And then they developed autism.

Those vignettes are almost certainly correct. We can't pin it down to any single vaccine, but I'm telling you in total, it doesn't look good.

This epidemic of autism is a tsunami. And you know now, many, many mothers now, recent Kaiser Family Foundation survey shows, about a third of mothers and young fathers – going natural.

https://forbiddennews.substack.com/p/world-council-for-health-calling?publication_id=1658626&post_id=145742550&isFreemail=true&r=16ettj&triedRedirect=true

Reprinted from the COURAGEOUS DISCOURSE - Unmasking COVID-19 Deceptions A Q&A with Dr. Peter McCullough, Internist, Cardiologist, and Chief Scientific Officer of the Wellness Company

CROSS-POST FROM THE GREAT WAKEUP

Colleagues Please see this post by leading author Michael Ashley. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH -

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

Dr. Peter McCullough is globally recognized for his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing expert advice when few other doctors would publicly stand for the truth. Coauthor of The Courage to Face COVID-19, he advocates for patient well-being over governmental, pharmaceutical, or deep state interests.

Note: this is a 4-part series. In Part I, we will get to know Dr. Peter McCullough, learning of his impressive career in medicine, and the importance of his intellectual courage during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MA: I’m so honored to have you here, Dr. McCullough. Could you give us a little background about yourself?

PM: Sure, I'm delighted. It's great to be with you. I'm Dr. Peter McCullough, a practicing internist and cardiologist in the Dallas Fort Worth area. I've been in practice now for decades and am also trained in epidemiology. It turns out that’s an important discipline to have experience in during these pandemic years.

MA: What motivated you to take such an active role in the pandemic response, and how did your experience in epidemiology influence your approach?

PM: For the last five years, I've taken a lead in pandemic response, focusing on what we should do to care for those who have gotten sick with COVID-19 and how we should respond. I've advised both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate and testified multiple times. You know, Michael, it’s interesting—throughout the pandemic, our public health agencies had no Q&A sessions, no town hall meetings, and the medical schools closed their doors. People have had questions they’ve wanted answered for years now.

MA: You displayed tremendous courage as one of the few doctors who did not comply with the sanctioned COVID-19 pandemic responses. How can others, especially those who are fearful, make decisions that exhibit such bravery in these trying times?

PM: We're talking about intellectual courage here. Bullets are not flying; buildings are not crumbling. We're not scrambling for our lives. But we've been in this intellectual struggle, of, can we actually face what's going on? Or do we want to put our heads in the sand? I think many were especially fearful when their jobs were on the line.

MA: Can you share a specific example of a time when you faced significant backlash for your stance?

PM: When it came down to it, many people said, “Something is going on. I don't fully understand it. But boy, if I stand up and say something, I may lose my job.” Suddenly that job became a real tether for them. I'm so envious of people who are self-employed. They didn’t have to abide by their employer’s wishes. Were you self-employed through this yourself?

MA: Thankfully, yes.

PM: So, I'm so envious. You never had the specter of some large corporation trying to force you to do something against your will. You were fortunate. Those who are independent contractors or self-employed had more options. But can you imagine if you were in the Screen Actors Guild?

MA: It would have been very difficult with my livelihood on the line.  Considering the importance of public opinion and the potential backlash even self-employed individuals may face for being outspoken, what advice do you have for those wanting to take a public stand now?

PM: Let's just talk about courage. Courage is not the absence of fear. Courage is the ability to overcome that fear. That's what we've learned in this pandemic—the ability to overcome fear or uncertainty is not that common. It's just not.

I never considered myself particularly courageous. I've never gone skydiving or done anything physically amazing. I was an academic, a Professor of Medicine. I did what I was supposed to do throughout my career. Certainly, I made mistakes—we all do. But there was no checkbox for courage in college, medical school, graduate school, residency, or fellowship, like, 'Are you particularly courageous?' No. And I think there are checkboxes for policemen, firemen, or people in the military, where it really does take courage to throw yourself into a burning building to try to rescue somebody, or it takes guts to jump out of an air transport plane. I'm not sure I could do that. I'm a doctor but I think what I've always had in the course of my career is intellectual courage.

MA: How did you navigate the opposition from your peers during your early research and what kept you motivated?

PM: I'll give you an example. When I was trying to find my way in cardiology research, I was making observations that kidney disease was influencing cardiovascular disease, atherosclerosis, and heart failure. And I remember that with my first observations, people would say, "No. Now that's just confounding. They just have more diabetes and hypertension."

I said, "No, I think it's actually related to the kidneys themselves." And they said, "No, that can’t be the case." Finally, I said, "Wait a minute. How do these people know that’s not the case? Let’s investigate." So, I really launched my career going against the mainstream narrative of cardiovascular epidemiology at the time and it led to many discoveries. For instance, the kidneys produce a series of hormones that speak to the heart. A seminal paper I published as a senior author explained exactly that. It was published in the New England Journal of Medicine and other top journals. That was a triumph—it was as good as you can perform in my field in terms of a breakthrough. And it was an in vitro diagnostic breakthrough. Back then the naysayers said, "No, we don't need a test to help us with this." I went lecturing across the globe on this matter. That took intellectual courage.

MA: Did you have any mentors or influences who helped shape your approach to medicine, fostering such intellectual courage?

PM: I do give credit to a mentor: Dr. William O'Neill. When I was a fellow, he was going up against a different narrative. At the time, the most dangerous heart attack was called an ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, and the standard of care was to give an expensive Big Pharma drug called TPA. The company promoting this was Genentech. They were in bed with the Cleveland Clinic, and the Chief of Cardiology, Eric Topol, had a deal where he was getting stock certificates every time doctors prescribed TPA.

MA: What specific lessons from your mentor were most impactful in your approach to handling the COVID-19 pandemic?

PM: Back when I was at another hospital, Dr. William O'Neill, who previously supervised Eric Topol at University of Michigan, recruited me and others. We formed this kind of dream team in cardiology. We set out to successfully demonstrate it was better to get catheters up in the heart and open up the blood vessels. That’s called primary angioplasty. We went up against Genentech as a ragtag team of community hospitals and we prevailed. We published paper after paper.

We changed care in the United States after that because we refused to do what everyone else said. Eventually, the Genentech product died out. Nobody used it. A brand-new revolution began in cardiology. Then sure enough, when COVID started, I proposed we treat patients early to prevent hospitalization and death, something that should be so simple to everyone. But the orthodoxy tried to shut us down. They said, "No. don't touch this illness."

MA: You mentioned being brave doesn't mean proceeding without fear. Rather, it’s being able to summon courage despite feeling fearful. You're essentially pushing through it. Is that correct?

PM: That's true. It also takes confidence. Look at the film Braveheart. Mel Gibson plays the Sottish warrior William Wallace who leads the charge to free his country from English tyranny. He's confident. I've always considered myself a very confident person. It's just in my makeup. Years ago I was blessed to have dinner with Larry King, the famous interviewer, before he died. I asked him, "How could you interview Brezhnev and all these heads of state around the world?"

He said, "Peter, I was born confident. When I was a little kid in New York City, I was always the most confident kid on the block." So, Larry King was also inherently confident. I'd characterize myself as inherently confident in my approach, my analytics, and my principles. In medicine, of course, we rely on scientific principles as well as strong evidence and data. I've made hundreds and hundreds of media appearances over the last five years. People have repeatedly said, "Dr. McCullough always cites his information." That’s because I've had the discipline to commit things to memory.

MA: How did all that confidence and preparation help you in your media appearances and congressional testimonies?

PM: I testified in the US House of Representatives on January 12, 2024, just a few days after Dr. Anthony Fauci was there before the same committee. They grilled me for hours. All along, I cited paper after paper I'd committed to memory. I’d practice beforehand. I’d get up in the morning and I’d practice. I don't have a photographic memory. It's just that I work hard. At one point, I did get a chance to ask the committee something. "Listen,” I said. “I've been at this for hours now, citing dozens and dozens of papers. You just had Dr. Anthony Fauci in this chamber. I bet he didn't cite a single paper." They said, "You’re correct, Dr. McCullough. He couldn't cite a single paper supporting his statements."

MA: That’s so frustrating. Especially since Dr. Fauci was all but deified by the legacy media.

PM: Dr. Scott Atlas wrote the book A Plague Upon Our House, had face-to-face interactions with Fauci for months. Scott said Fauci did not know the studies he should have been citing, nor did he know the data. According to Scott, Fauci was so incompetent, he couldn’t even pronounce long medical words. At times he was almost worse than a medical student.

MA: Again, that’s disheartening, especially since so many people in legacy media and our politicians still revere him as the definitive COVID expert.

The Great Wakeup is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/cp/145377875