WASHINGTON – The Senate confirmed Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the Health and Human Services secretary on Thursday, giving the longtime vaccine critic who has vowed to take on „big pharma“ and ultra-processed food the power to oversee the nationâs food and healthcare systems.
Archiv: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) / USA
Senate confirms RFK Jr. as HHS secretary in 52-48 vote
Kennedy, 71, is a longtime environmental lawyer and anti-vaccine activist whose family has mythic status in Democratic politics. The nephew of President John F. Kennedy and the son of Robert F. Kennedy launched his own White House bid in 2023. And although he initially sought the Democratic nomination, Kennedy changed his bid to independent, before dropping out to endorse President Trump in Augus
Biden issues preemptive pardons for Milley, Fauci and Jan. 6 committee members
Fauci served as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infection Disease for decades, including during the outbreak of Covid in Trumpâs first presidency, and Milley served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during Trumpâs first term and has warned Trump is a fascist.
Courts Strike a Blow Against White House‘s Social Media Censorship | Opinion
The plaintiffs in the case, led by the states of Missouri and Louisiana, eminent doctors, and others alleged that under guise of combating „mis-, dis-, and mal-information,“ the Biden White House and nearly a dozen federal agencies have, alongside private-sector cutouts, cajoled and colluded with Big Tech platforms to silence millions of Americans. The topics social media platforms have censored at the government‘s direction, measuring likely hundreds of millions of posts, range from the Hunter Biden laptop story, to matters of election integrity, to virtually every aspect of the coronavirus pandemic.
Guidance for Certifying Deaths Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVIDâ19)
(April 4, 2020)
In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVIDâ19 cannot be made, but it is suspected or likely (e.g., the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), it is acceptable to report COVIDâ19 on a death certificate as âprobableâ or âpresumed.â In these instances, certifiers should
use their best clinical judgement in determining if a COVIDâ19 infection was likely. However, please note that testing for COVIDâ19 should be conducted whenever possible.
(…)
When a death is due to COVIDâ19, it is likely the UCOD and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate. Ideally, testing for COVIDâ19 should be conducted, but it is acceptable to report COVIDâ19 on a death certificate without this confirmation if the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty.
Wie die Berechnung der Opferzahlen weltweit zustande kommt
(15. April 2020)
Am 4. April gab das C.D.C. einen „Leitfaden fĂŒr die Zertifizierung von TodesfĂ€llen aufgrund der Coronavirus-Krankheit 2019 (COVID-19)“ („Guidance for Certifying Deaths Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVIDâ19)“) heraus. In diesem heiĂt es wörtlich:
„In FĂ€llen, in denen eine definitive Diagnose von COVID-19 nicht gestellt werden kann, dies jedoch verdĂ€chtigt wird oder wahrscheinlich ist (z.B. wenn die UmstĂ€nde innerhalb eines vernĂŒnftigen MaĂes an Sicherheit ĂŒberzeugend sind), ist es akzeptabel, COVID-19 auf einem Totenschein als „vermutet“ oder „mutmaĂlich“ zu melden.“
Original:
„In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVIDâ19 cannot be made, but it is suspected or likely (e.g., the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), it is acceptable to report COVIDâ19 on a death certificate as âprobableâ or âpresumed.â
Und im letzten Teil, sowohl als kongeniale SelbstbegrĂŒndung als auch Ă€uĂerst pragmatische Handlungsanweisung:
„Wenn ein Todesfall auf COVID-19 zurĂŒckzufĂŒhren ist, ist er wahrscheinlich die zugrunde liegende Todesursache („UCOD“) und sollte daher in der untersten Zeile in Teil I des Totenscheins angegeben werden. Im Idealfall sollte auf COVID-19 getestet werden, aber es ist akzeptabel, COVID-19 ohne diese BestĂ€tigung auf einer Sterbeurkunde zu melden, wenn die UmstĂ€nde mit einem vernĂŒnftigen MaĂ an Sicherheit ĂŒberzeugend sind.“
Original:
„When a death is due to COVIDâ19, it is likely the UCOD and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate. Ideally, testing for COVIDâ19 should be conducted, but it is acceptable to report COVIDâ19 on a death certificate without this confirmation if the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty.“
(…)
Wo nahm nun aber das Statistik- und Medienkarussell der „Corona-Toten“ oder gar „vermuteten Corona-Toten“ seinen Anfang, dass der berĂŒhmten „mehrheitsfĂ€higen“ Rotte des Homo Sapiens dermaĂen den Kopf verdrehte, dass sie sich gleich die ganze Demokratie rausschleudern lieĂen?
Am 20. MĂ€rz hatte die Weltgesundheitsbehörde W.H.O. einen „Interims-Leitfaden“ herausgegeben. Original-Titel: „Global surveillance for COVID-19 caused by human infection with COVID-19 virus“. In diesem legte die W.H.O. drei Kategorien von KrankheitsfĂ€llen fest:
VerdachtsfĂ€lle („suspect case“)
vermutete FĂ€lle („probable case“)
bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle („confirmed case“)
Als „VerdachtsfĂ€lle“ definierte die W.H.O.. neben vielen anderen hochinteressanten Parametern, u.a. alle Personen mit „akuter Atemwegserkrankung“, die mit „einem bestĂ€tigten oder vermuteten Fall“ in Kontakt gewesen waren – bis zu vierzehn Tage vor dem Auftreten von Symptomen.
Und als „vermutete FĂ€lle“ definierte die W.H.O alle FĂ€lle, in denen Testergebnisse nicht schlĂŒssig waren, sowie alle „VerdachtsfĂ€lle“ die nicht getestet wurden.
Das kann man schon als genial bezeichnen.
Und dann wies die W.H.O. alle Gesundheitsbehörden weltweit an, „vermutete und bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle“ an sie zu melden.
Discreetly Deleted From CDC Website: âmRNA and the Spike Protein Do Not Last Long in the Bodyâ
How many Americans took the Covid-19 jabs because they believed people like Anthony Fauci or organizations like the CDC when they said the spike proteins didnât stay in the bodies of the injected? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Millions?
If reports that the spike proteins last indefinitely werenât ignored by corporate media and suppressed by Big Tech, would more Americans have opted out of taking the âvaccinesâ? Absolutely.
Now, the CDC has discreetly removed from their website the important claim theyâve made from the beginning that spike proteins, whether injected directly into the body through J&J jabs or created by the body through the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA jabs, do not last long in the body.
Conflicting statements by @CDC officials about monitoring COVID-19 adverse events calls into question their integrity and transparency. This is just another example of why Americans have completely lost faith in federal health agencies.
CDC grilled after revealing it didn‘t perform data analysis on COVID-19 vaccine doses
(July 26, 2022)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) is demanding answers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after the agency told a nonprofit group that it never conducted a mandated data mining analysis on reported adverse effects that followed the administration of COVID-19 vaccine doses.
The CDC is tasked with performing a proportional reporting ratio, or PRR, data mining analysis on a weekly basis to determine whether the amount of reported „adverse events“ following the administration of COVID-19 vaccine doses in the public Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, database is proportional to reported adverse events linked to the administration of other vaccines.
But the CDC said in a June 16 letter to Children‘s Health Defense, a nonprofit group led by anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., that „no PRRs were conducted by the CDC.“ The CDC‘s letter, which was in response to an FOIA request submitted by the group, added that „data mining is outside of th[e] agency‘s purview“.
Elon Musk has been talking about an âunderpopulation crisisâ for years. So why did the U.S. birth rate rise 1% last year?
But a new report released Tuesday from the National Center for Health Statistics, part of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention that compiles health data and science, reveals that birth rates in the U.S. are not collapsing, and in fact rose 1% in 2021.
âThe 1% increase in the number of births in 2021 was the first increase in births since 2014,â researchers for the National Vital Statistics System, the division within the NCHS that produces reports using birth data, wrote. The data, which is based on registered birth certificates, is provisional and could be subject to change.
Biden Handing Over U.S. Sovereignty to WHO
(May 4, 2022)
Please take seriously the severity of this existential threat to everything free people hold dear. Do everything in your power to pass this report on to others and to find ways to communicate with and to influence people to stop empowering WHO to take over our national sovereignty and freedom.
On May 22-28, 2022, ultimate control over Americaâs healthcare system, and hence its national sovereignty, will be delivered for a vote to the World Health Organizationâs governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).
This threat is contained in new amendments to WHOâs International Health Regulations, proposed by the Biden administration, that are scheduled as âProvisional agenda item 16.2â at the upcoming conference on May 22-28, 2022.1
These amendments will empower WHOâs Director-General to declare health emergencies or crises in any nation and to do so unilaterally and against the opposition of the target nation. The Director-General will be able to declare these health crises based merely on his personal opinion or consideration that there is a potential or possible threat to other nations.
International Health Regulations: A big step toward a health dictatorship is imminent
(12 May 2022)
A US proposal to amend the International Health Regulations (IHR) is scheduled to be voted on at the May 22-28 World Health Assembly.
The proposal was sent to WHO member countries by the WHO Director General as early as January 20. However, the proposal was only made available to the public on April 12, and in a way that hardly anybody took notice. Mainstream media coverage is virtually nonexistent. I became aware of it through a May 8 report by the independent Austrian news portal tkp.at, which in turn learned of it only through a May 4 report by the portal America Out Loud.
The US proposal is characterized throughout by changes that would empower the WHO to declare health emergencies for countries and regions without involvement or consent of the respective governments, and to dictate countermeasures, even including the deployment of foreign teams of experts.
WHO Stealth Coup to Dictate Global Health Agenda of Gates, Big Pharma
Doing something with stealth means doing it in a secretive or concealed manner, to prevent it being widely known and possibly opposed. This applies to the proposal given by the Biden Administration to the Geneva WHO in January 18, 2022 according to official WHO documents. The WHO hid the details of the US âamendmentsâ for almost three months, until 12 April, just a month before the relevant body of the WHO meets to approve the radical measures. Moreover, rather than the previous 18 month waiting time to become treaty in international law, only 6 months are used this time. This is a bumâs rush. The US proposal is backed by every EU country and in total 47 countries ensuring almost certain passage.
The proposals, officially titled, âStrengthening WHO preparedness for and response to health emergencies: Proposal for amendments to the International Health Regulations,â were submitted by Assistant Secretary for Global Affairs (OGA) in the US Department of Health and Human Services, Loyce Pace, as âamendmentsâ to a previously ratified 2005 WHO International Health Regulations treaty. The WHO defines that 2005 treaty thus: âthe International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) provide an overarching legal framework that defines countriesâ rights and obligations in handling public health events and emergencies that have the potential to cross borders. The IHR are an instrument of international law that is legally-binding on 196 countries, including the 194 WHO Member States.â
Wie die Berechnung der Opferzahlen weltweit zustande kommt
(15. April 2020)
Am 4. April gab das C.D.C. einen „Leitfaden fĂŒr die Zertifizierung von TodesfĂ€llen aufgrund der Coronavirus-Krankheit 2019 (COVID-19)“ („Guidance for Certifying Deaths Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVIDâ19)“) heraus. In diesem heiĂt es wörtlich:
„In FĂ€llen, in denen eine definitive Diagnose von COVID-19 nicht gestellt werden kann, dies jedoch verdĂ€chtigt wird oder wahrscheinlich ist (z.B. wenn die UmstĂ€nde innerhalb eines vernĂŒnftigen MaĂes an Sicherheit ĂŒberzeugend sind), ist es akzeptabel, COVID-19 auf einem Totenschein als „vermutet“ oder „mutmaĂlich“ zu melden.“
Original:
„In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVIDâ19 cannot be made, but it is suspected or likely (e.g., the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), it is acceptable to report COVIDâ19 on a death certificate as âprobableâ or âpresumed.â
Und im letzten Teil, sowohl als kongeniale SelbstbegrĂŒndung als auch Ă€uĂerst pragmatische Handlungsanweisung:
„Wenn ein Todesfall auf COVID-19 zurĂŒckzufĂŒhren ist, ist er wahrscheinlich die zugrunde liegende Todesursache („UCOD“) und sollte daher in der untersten Zeile in Teil I des Totenscheins angegeben werden. Im Idealfall sollte auf COVID-19 getestet werden, aber es ist akzeptabel, COVID-19 ohne diese BestĂ€tigung auf einer Sterbeurkunde zu melden, wenn die UmstĂ€nde mit einem vernĂŒnftigen MaĂ an Sicherheit ĂŒberzeugend sind.“
Original:
„When a death is due to COVIDâ19, it is likely the UCOD and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate. Ideally, testing for COVIDâ19 should be conducted, but it is acceptable to report COVIDâ19 on a death certificate without this confirmation if the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty.“
(…)
Wo nahm nun aber das Statistik- und Medienkarussell der „Corona-Toten“ oder gar „vermuteten Corona-Toten“ seinen Anfang, dass der berĂŒhmten „mehrheitsfĂ€higen“ Rotte des Homo Sapiens dermaĂen den Kopf verdrehte, dass sie sich gleich die ganze Demokratie rausschleudern lieĂen?
Am 20. MĂ€rz hatte die Weltgesundheitsbehörde W.H.O. einen „Interims-Leitfaden“ herausgegeben. Original-Titel: „Global surveillance for COVID-19 caused by human infection with COVID-19 virus“. In diesem legte die W.H.O. drei Kategorien von KrankheitsfĂ€llen fest:
VerdachtsfĂ€lle („suspect case“)
vermutete FĂ€lle („probable case“)
bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle („confirmed case“)
Als „VerdachtsfĂ€lle“ definierte die W.H.O.. neben vielen anderen hochinteressanten Parametern, u.a. alle Personen mit „akuter Atemwegserkrankung“, die mit „einem bestĂ€tigten oder vermuteten Fall“ in Kontakt gewesen waren – bis zu vierzehn Tage vor dem Auftreten von Symptomen.
Und als „vermutete FĂ€lle“ definierte die W.H.O alle FĂ€lle, in denen Testergebnisse nicht schlĂŒssig waren, sowie alle „VerdachtsfĂ€lle“ die nicht getestet wurden.
Das kann man schon als genial bezeichnen.
Und dann wies die W.H.O. alle Gesundheitsbehörden weltweit an, „vermutete und bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle“ an sie zu melden.
Die verquere Aussagelogik der RKI-Zahlen
(heute)
Hinzu kommt, dass das CDC zur Dokumentation von Covid als Todesursache inzwischen eine eigene Leitlinie herausgegeben hat, in der die DurchfĂŒhrung eines Covid-Tests vor Dokumentation von Covid als Todesursache empfohlen wird, aber nicht als notwendig erachtet wird. Diese Vorgehensweise bietet eine mögliche ErklĂ€rung fĂŒr die in den USA prozentual fast doppelt so hohen Covid-Todeszahlen im Vergleich zu Deutschland.
Das RKI hingegen behauptet nicht, Corona als sichere Todesursache angeben zu können; es wird der bekannte Ausdruck âmit und an Corona verstorbenâ verwendet. Dennoch werden auch hier alle verstorbenen coronapositiven Patienten in einen Zahlentopf geworfen…
Afrika plant kontinentale Gesundheitsorganisation
Einen entsprechenden Entwurf billigten die Staats- und Regierungschefs der Afrikanischen Union (AU) an diesem Wochenende auf ihrem Gipfeltreffen in Ăthiopiens Haupstadt Addis Abeba.
Basis soll die vor fĂŒnf Jahren gegrĂŒndete panafrikanische Gesundheitsorganisation Africa CDC sein, gab deren Leiter John Nkengasong heute bekannt.
In this clip, @JakeTapper is absolutely right that counting all people in the hospital WITH COVID as being there FOR COVID is wildly misleading — especially since it applies to close to 50% — but it‘s so striking how many arguments that were long taboo are now all being aired.
Jake Tapper Rails Against ‚Misleading‘ CDC COVID Hospitalization Numbers
Tapper said: „We‘re two years into this and we need the clearest picture possible if somebody is in the hospital with a broken leg and they also have asymptomatic COVID. That should not be counted as hospitalized with COVID, clearly.“
CDC Director: 75% of COVID Deaths Among Vaccinated had Four Comorbidities
Ahead of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on vaccine mandates expected as early as this week, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control is under increased scrutiny after recent comments about COVID-19 deaths.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky fell into controversy after a clip of her appearance on Good Morning America Friday went viral.
CNN anchor calls out CDC for ‚misleading‘ COVID hospitalization data, and Dr. Sanjay Gupta agrees
CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Dr. Sanjay Gupta, the network‘s top medical correspondent, agreed Monday the method being used by the government to report COVID-19 hospitalizations is explicitly „misleading.“
What is the background?
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which manages COVID data reporting, does not distinguish between people hospitalized for COVID (meaning complications from the virus caused them to be hospitalized) or people hospitalized with COVID (meaning people who test positive for COVID after being admitted for reasons unrelated to the virus).
US-Kliniken verzeichnen Höchststand an Covid-Patienten
Nach Zahlen des US-Gesundheitsministeriums werden in Kliniken des Landes derzeit rund 146.000 Patienten wegen der durch das Coronavirus verursachten Lungenkrankheit Covid-19 behandelt, davon fast 24.000 auf der Intensivstation. Der bisherige Höchstwert der Corona-Krankenhauspatienten war am 14. Januar vergangenen Jahres mit mehr als 142.000 registriert worden. Offiziellen Zahlen zufolge ist die groĂe Mehrheit der Krankenhauspatienten nicht geimpft.
CDC Director Walensky fails to disclose how many deaths were ‚from‘ COVID-19: ‚Data will be forthcoming‘
„Do you know how many of the 836,000 deaths in the U.S. linked to COVID are from COVID or how many are with COVID, but they had other comorbidities? Do you have that breakdown?“ Bret Baier asked Walensky on „Fox News Sunday.“
„Yes of course with omicron we‘re following that very carefully,“ Walensky responded. „Our death registry of course takes a few weeksâŠto collect. And of course omicron has just been with us for a few weeks. But those data will be forthcoming.“
CDC director admits over 75% of Covid deaths had at least 4 pathological conditions (comorbidities).Since the total death rate is 0.27% this means healthy people have a 0.0% death risk.
#WakeUp #NothingToFearButFearItself
Womenâs Periods May Be Late After Coronavirus Vaccination, Study Suggests
A study published on Thursday found that womenâs menstrual cycles did indeed change following vaccination against the coronavirus. The authors reported that women who were inoculated had slightly longer menstrual cycles after receiving the vaccine than those who were not vaccinated.
Their periods themselves, which came almost a day later on average, were not prolonged, however, and the effect was transient, with cycle lengths bouncing back to normal within one or two months.
Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons
(April 21, 2021)
Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) were pregnancy losses and 712 (86.1%) were live births (mostly among participants vaccinated in the third trimester).
US-Studie: CoV-Impfung verzögert Periode bei Frauen leicht
Laut der gestern in dem Fachjournal âObstetrics & Gynecologyâ veröffentlichten Studie setzte bei geimpften Frauen die Blutung etwa einen Tag spĂ€ter ein als bei ungeimpften Frauen.
Die Dauer der Monatsblutung wurde demnach jedoch nicht beeinflusst. Den Forschern zufolge sind die Auswirkungen der Impfung auf die Periode gering und voraussichtlich nur vorĂŒbergehend.
Coronavirus: Auch das Robert-Koch-Institut ĂŒbernimmt âvermuteteâ FĂ€lle und TodesfĂ€lle in seine Statistiken
(21. April 2020)
Am 22. MĂ€rz setzen Bundesregierung und Landesregierung in einer Videokonferenz das Grundgesetz auĂer Kraft und verhĂ€ngten die allgemeinen Verbote, die hier nicht alle aufgezĂ€hlt werden sollen.
Am 23. MĂ€rz schickte das „Deutsche Institut fĂŒr Medizinische Information und Dokumentation“ (DIMDI), welches dem Gesundheitsministerium von Jens Spahn und damit der Regierung unterstellt ist, eine Meldung mit der Ăberschrift „U07.2 kodiert Verdacht auf COVID-19″ heraus und wies diesbezĂŒglich an:
„Benutze diese SchlĂŒsselnummer, wenn COVID-19 klinisch-epidemiologisch bestĂ€tigt ist und das Virus nicht durch Labortest nachgewiesen wurde oder kein Labortest zur VerfĂŒgung steht.“
Dies entsprach eins zu eins den W.H.O.-Vorgaben.
Auch den Umgang mit TodesfĂ€llen und Statistiken ĂŒbernahm das Regierungsinstitut DIMDI von der W.H.O., praktischerweise in einer Ăbersetzung:
„COVID-19 âKodierregeln fĂŒr die MortalitĂ€t in der ICD-10 [bereitgestellt von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO)]
Beide Kategorien, U07.1 (COVID-19, Virus nachgewiesen) und U07.2 (COVID-19, Virus nicht nachgewiesen), sind fĂŒr die Kodierung der Todesursache (Grundleiden) zugelassen.“
Am 25. MĂ€rz vermeldete das Robert-Koch-Institut in einem Situationsbericht:
„Das DIMDI hat einen neuen ICD-Code fĂŒr den Verdacht auf COVID-19 eingefĂŒhrt:
– U07.1 (COVID-19, Virus nachgewiesen ): SchlĂŒsselnummer, wenn COVID-19 durch einen Labortest nachgewiesen ist, ungeachtet des Schweregrades des klinischen Befundes oder der Symptome.
– U07.2 (COVID-19 o.n.A., Virus nicht nachgewiesen): SchlĂŒsselnummer, wenn COVID-19 klinisch-epidemiologisch bestĂ€tigt ist und das Virus nicht durch Labortest nachgewiesen wurde oder kein Labortest zur VerfĂŒgung steht.“
Wie die Berechnung der Opferzahlen weltweit zustande kommt
(15. April 2020)
Am 20. MĂ€rz hatte die Weltgesundheitsbehörde W.H.O. einen „Interims-Leitfaden“ herausgegeben. Original-Titel: „Global surveillance for COVID-19 caused by human infection with COVID-19 virus“. In diesem legte die W.H.O. drei Kategorien von KrankheitsfĂ€llen fest:
VerdachtsfĂ€lle („suspect case„)
vermutete FĂ€lle („probable case„)
bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle („confirmed case„)
Als „VerdachtsfĂ€lle“ definierte die W.H.O.. neben vielen anderen hochinteressanten Parametern, u.a. alle Personen mit „akuter Atemwegserkrankung“, die mit „einem bestĂ€tigten oder vermuteten Fall“ in Kontakt gewesen waren – bis zu vierzehn Tage vor dem Auftreten von Symptomen.
Und als „vermutete FĂ€lle“ definierte die W.H.O alle FĂ€lle, in denen Testergebnisse nicht schlĂŒssig waren, sowie alle „VerdachtsfĂ€lle“ die nicht getestet wurden.
Das kann man schon als genial bezeichnen.
Und dann wies die W.H.O. alle Gesundheitsbehörden weltweit an, „vermutete und bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle“ an sie zu melden. Zitat:
„Die WHO fordert die nationalen Behörden auf, vermutete und bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle von COVID-19-Infektionen innerhalb von 48 Stunden nach der Identifizierung zu melden“
Original:
„WHO requests that national authorities report probable and confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection within 48 hours of identification“.
SpĂ€testens jetzt mĂŒsste allen klar sein, warum seit diesem W.H.O.-Leitfaden vom 20. MĂ€rz weltweit die Zahlen von COVID-Kranken gestiegen sind.
Ebenso dĂŒrfte klar sein, dass der am 4. MĂ€rz von der U.S-Bundesbehörde C.D.C. herausgegebene Leitfaden schlicht dem der W.H.O. vom 20. MĂ€rz folgte.
Jetzt zu den TodesfÀllen.
Wie das „Canadian Institute for Health Information“ am 26. MĂ€rz in einem Bulletin vermeldete, hatte die „Weltgesundheitsorganisation“ (Eigenbezeichnung) nennende Organisation hinsichtlich COVID-19 eine neue Definitionsnorm aufgestellt: Code U07.2 („virus not identified“). Im Gegensatz zur bisherigen alleinigen Definitionsnorm Code U07.1, welche nur bestĂ€tigte FĂ€lle von COViD-19 umfasste, galt Code U07.2 nun auch fĂŒr alle VerdachtsfĂ€lle, die lediglich „klinisch oder epidemiologisch diagnostiziert“ wurden, aber deren Testergebnisse „unschlĂŒssig“ waren oder bei denen gar keine Tests durchgefĂŒhrt worden waren.
Und wie zÀhlt nun die W.H.O. weltweit die TodesfÀlle durch COVID-19?
„Sowohl U07.1 als auch U07.2 können zur Kodierung der MortalitĂ€t als Todesursache verwendet werden.“
Oder einfach gesagt: nach eigener Definition erfasst die „Weltgesundheitsorganisation“ seit Ende MĂ€rz nicht nur bestĂ€tigte, sondern auch VerdachtsfĂ€lle als „Corona-Tote“. VerdachtsfĂ€lle, deren Definition wiederum den jeweiligen Gesundheitsbehörden aller ehrenwerten Staaten weltweit zur Interpretation ausgeliefert sind.
USA: Omikron dominant â aber SchĂ€tzung nach unten korrigiert
FĂŒr die Woche bis zum 25. Dezember schĂ€tzt die Behörde, dass rund 59 Prozent der Neuinfektionen in den USA auf die Omikron-Variante zurĂŒckgehen. FĂŒr die Woche davor gibt die CDC nun einen Wert von knapp 23 Prozent an â zuvor hatte die Behörde hier noch etwa 73 Prozent geschĂ€tzt.
Die Behörde betont, dass sich die Zahlen zu einem spÀteren Zeitpunkt, wenn mehr Daten vorliegen, Àndern könnten.
White House lifting omicron travel ban on South Africa and seven other southern African countries
(24.12.2021)
White House spokesman Kevin Munoz said on Twitter that the decision was recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Munoz said the temporary travel bans bought scientists necessary time to study the new virus variant and conclude that the current vaccinations are effective in blunting its impact.
Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons
(April 21, 2021)
Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) were pregnancy losses and 712 (86.1%) were live births (mostly among participants vaccinated in the third trimester).
Fact Check-Data from a study does not conclude that over 80% of pregnancies end in miscarriage after COVID-19 vaccinations; figures taken out of context
(04.08.2021)
Of the 3,958 participants, 827 had what the study defines as a âcompleted pregnancyâ. This term includes those who either had a baby (what the authors call a âlive birthâ), or those who suffered from a miscarriage or still birth (termed âpregnancy lossâ in the study). The rest were either still pregnant or a follow-up had not yet been made by the time the preliminary analysis had been released.
Of the 827 women who had a completed pregnancy, 104 had a miscarriage.
CDC Study at Federal Prison in TX Finds No Vaccine Benefit: Vaccinated and Unvaxed Persons Infected w/COVID Transmitted It at the Same Rate. No Infected Prisoners Died Even Though Over 70% were Obese
(20.12.2021)
CDC Researchers studied a Corona outbreak in a prison in Texas in July 2021. In the following weeks, regular smears and tests were taken from a selected group of inmates. The result: There is no difference whatsoever between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated inmates.
No statistically significant difference was detected in the duration of viral culture positivity between participants who were fully vaccinated (median: 5 days) compared with those who were not fully vaccinated.
Transmission potential of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant in a federal prison, JulyâAugust 2021
(19.12.2021)
Results A total of 978 specimens were provided by 95 participants, of whom 78 (82%) were fully vaccinated and 17 (18%) were not fully vaccinated. No significant differences were detected in duration of RT-PCR positivity among fully vaccinated participants (median: 13 days) versus those not fully vaccinated (median: 13 days; p=0.50), or in duration of culture positivity (medians: 5 days and 5 days; p=0.29).
Selbe Virenlast und auch gleicher Zeitraum… „laut einer aktuellen klinischen Preprint-Studie herausgefunden, dass Geimpfte nach einem Virusausbruch in einem GefĂ€ngnis in Texas ĂŒber den gleichen Zeitraum lang ansteckend waren wie Ungeimpfte.“
(21.12.2021)
FDA Grants Emergency Use Authorization for Single Test to Differentiate Between COVID-19, Flu, RSV
(October 8, 2021)
Officials with the FDA have issued an emergency use authorization for PerkinElmerâs PKamp Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Panel 1 assay, a single test that can detect and differentiate between SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).
Could Contaminated COVID-19 Tests Help Spread the Virus?
(06.04.2020)
Imagine that you are not carrying the virus, but you go in for testing and leave carrying the virus.
The Telegraph report stated that it is ânot clearâ how the tests were contaminated.