UK Report: Over One Third of Children on Puberty Blockers Experienced Worsened Mental Health thumbnail

UK Report: Over One Third of Children on Puberty Blockers Experienced Worsened Mental Health

/in , , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

New research from the United Kingdom is showing that over a third of children placed on puberty blockers and hormone drugs suffered severe mental health deterioration afterwards.

A 2011 study conducted at the Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) clinic for children reported that children who were put on puberty blockers suffered no adverse mental health effects. However, new analysis conducted by Susan McPherson, a professor of psychology and sociology at the University of Essex, and retired social scientist David Freedman found that the majority of children put on puberty blockers and hormone drugs experienced erratic and fluctuating mental health, including over a third whose mental health “reliably deteriorated.”

The original study, conducted on 44 children between the ages of 12 and 15, was reportedly based on group averages, while the new analysis relied on individual results, which McPherson and Freedman explained “allows us to look at how a treatment is performing in terms of the percentage of patients improving, deteriorating, and showing clinically significant change. … It is possible, using this approach, to look at patterns, such as who is benefitting and who is not.”

Last year, Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) opted to close down the Tavistock GIDS clinic after a government report found that the staff rushed and even pressured minors into taking puberty blockers and hormone drugs with almost no psychological or medical oversight. A reported 96% of child patients were placed on puberty blockers by Tavistock staffers, and concerns were raised over a tendentious focus on “gender dysphoria,” instead of considering other psychological factors in recommending drugs or surgeries for minors, which were summarily dismissed. In fact, the situation was so concerning that Dr. Hillary Cass, the pediatrician tasked by the government with investigating the claims against Tavistock, offered her recommendation to shut down the clinic several months early, saying she had enough information already to justify closing Tavistock.

Cass particularly stressed concerns she had over the use of puberty blockers and other hormone drugs, which the Tavistock clinic had been prescribing to children as young as 10 years old, many of whom were already on the autism spectrum or suffering various mental health issues like depression or eating disorders. In her interim report to the NHS, Cass noted, “There is lack of consensus and open discussion about the nature of gender dysphoria and therefore about the appropriate clinical response.” She added, “There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.”

Over the years, numerous whistleblowers — former staff governor Dr. David Bell, consultants and nurses like Marcus and Sue Evans, child safeguarding officer Sonia Appleby, and countless former patients who now, as adults, regret being put on puberty blockers and hormone drugs — have sounded the alarm over the Tavistock clinic’s practices. Most have pointed out that children and their parents were often denied informed consent as staffers rushed children onto puberty blockers after only three or four meetings. Some whistleblowers even explained that topics like “sexual orientation” were effectively off-limits and that a transgender identity and a battery of hormone drugs were the only options explored by clinicians. Others pointed out that the drastic rise in children going through Tavistock (from about 250 “patients” in 2011 to over 5,000 in 2021) and linked it to the growing puberty blocker and hormone drug industry.

The findings of the new analysis of the Tavistock study are in line with research conducted and published by Family Research Council. Dr. Jennifer Bauwens, director of FRC’s Center for Family Studies, explained earlier this year:

“At one time, gender dysphoria was considered a mental disorder, but now, due to the increasing prevalence of a worldview shaped by gender identity ideology, it has morphed into a human rights issue. The ideology borrows from the mental health aspects of gender dysphoria in order to justify medical ‘intervention.’”

She continued, “Advocates of gender-affirming care insist it is both lifesaving and evidence-based health care for those who identify as transgender. But the research used to make such a claim is full of methodological errors and can be easily disputed as a research body that is incomplete.” Notably, the original Tavistock study from 2011 focused on group studies instead of on individual situations and results. Bauwens added, “Not only are the currently published studies problematic, but there is a lack of ongoing and long-term follow-up reports that address the impact of cross-sex hormones and surgeries.”

In June, the NHS banned the use of puberty blockers and hormone drugs on minors, following a growing swath of European medical experts who have backed off gender transition procedures for children. France, Sweden, Finland, and Norway have also put restrictions on the use of puberty blockers and hormone drugs on children. The U.S. still hasn’t.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICES:

‘Let Us Raise Our Kids’: Thousands of Canadians Protest LGBT School Policies

Most Americans Don’t Consider Same-Sex Couples Raising Kids ‘Completely Acceptable’: Pew Poll

Roy Introduces Bill to Repeal FACE Act and End the Persecution of Pro-Lifers

‘There Are New Threats’: Experts Discuss How to Stop the Sexualization of Children

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

A Noted Physician Advocates COVID Civil Disobedience thumbnail

A Noted Physician Advocates COVID Civil Disobedience

/in , , , , /by

By Barry Brownstein

Famously, at the start of his 1849 essay, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau observed, “That government is best which governs least.”

Few policymakers or politicians during COVID were influenced by Thoreau, who also pointed out that “government never furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got of its way.”  Did government mandates and lockdowns make us safer or less safe during COVID? Healthier or less healthy?

Thoreau defined the “right of revolution” as “the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable.”

Dr. Vinay Prasad is a practicing oncologist and a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco. He is one of the foremost practitioners of evidence-based medicine in the world. He believes the time has come to “refuse allegiance” and “resist” the COVID bureaucracy, which resorts to lies. 

To those who justify irrational policies such as masking a toddler, Prasad writes, “Just because things are bad, or the disease is worse than the intervention, doesn’t mean the intervention helps, or should be done.” Prasad is bringing Frédéric Bastiat’s classic idea to medicine: Do not ignore consequences.

Prasad has become increasingly disturbed at policies made for political, not medical, reasons. Recently, responding to a report that N-95 masks are being mandated for children enrolled at a Montgomery County school, in Maryland (a suburb of DC), Prasad wrote, “Only non-violent resistance can halt irrational public health actors.” At this point, note that the original title of Thoreau’s essay was “Resistance to Civil Government.”

The following are the forms of non-violent resistance Prasad recommends: Even if you or your child are sick, do not test for COVID. Send your child back to school when he is well enough. “Stop reporting these illnesses” to schools and employers. “Complain to your employer about any mandates.”  “Decline any further COVID-19 vaccination, unless RCTs [randomized controlled trials] show benefit in your age group.”

In short, ignore authorities; they don’t have your best interests in mind. Prasad adds that this resistance “is the only logical course left… It’s time to go dark with all COVID data. If enough people don’t participate, the irrationality will stop. Eventually.”

If Prasad had advocated this in 2020 or 2021, he may have found his board certification subject to disciplinary hearings. But this is 2023, and despite censorship, evidence is mounting, and the intellectual climate is changing.

Isn’t all medicine evidence-based medicine? Dr Prasad would answer, if only. In 2015, with his colleague Dr. Adam Cifu, Prasad wrote Ending Medical Reversal. Prasad and Cifu observed:

Medicine is the application of science. When a scientific theory is disproved, it should happen in a lab or in the equivalent place in clinical science, the controlled clinical trial. It should not be disproved in the world of clinical medicine, where millions of people may have already been exposed to an ineffective, or perhaps even harmful, treatment.

In their book, Prasad and Cifu wrote, “Each of us recalls moments when we realized that what we had told our patients, or did for them, was wrong: We had promoted an accepted practice that was, at best, ineffective.” Notice the use of the qualifier “at best,” as often interventions are harmful.

Prasad and Cifu estimated “as much as 40 percent of the things doctors do are ineffective.” They give many examples, such as estrogen replacement for postmenopausal women and medical procedures such as “stenting open coronary lesions in people with stable angina.”

If you watch television, you have probably seen the incessant Pfizer ads promoting their COVID treatment drug, Paxlovid. Yet, Dr. Prasad tells us, that despite the Biden administration’s pushing and subsidizing the drug, there is little evidence that the drug works.

Even without cronyism showing the way, ineffective and dangerous drugs are not uncommon in the annals of medicine. Until 1992, the drug flecainide was part of the standard of care to stabilize patients with irregular heart rhythms. Prasad and Cifu reported, “a large study called the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (or CAST trial) showed that flecainide, as well as a similar drug, decreased PVCs as expected but also increased patients’ chance of dying.” (emphasis added.)

Prasad and Cifu drew the essential conclusion that “even the most careful reasoning and the best scientific models do not guarantee an effective clinical treatment. What works in the lab, or on a computer, or in the head of the smartest researcher does not always work in a patient.” 

Yet Prasad and Cifu acknowledge, “this is a lesson that many physicians and leading researchers still have not really learned.” Lack of learning contributed mightily to the devastating policy errors during COVID. 

Writing years before COVID, Prasad and Cifu observed, “What has happened in medicine is that the hypothesized treatment is often instituted in millions of people, and billions of dollars are spent, before adequate research is done.” During the pandemic, necessary economic tripwires were disabled when vaccine manufacturers were indemnified from liability for harm caused by their products.

Prasad and Cifu provide timeless insights into why ineffective and dangerous treatments persist without “a strong evidence base.” They observe, “The weak evidence base is often ignored because of doctors’ faith in mechanistic explanations or studies that were designed to be deceptive by industry.”

Prasad and Cifu described the “act now, data later” mindset so common in medicine and in life today: “We have a problem; we need a solution. We hear the mantra every day. We need to solve this problem now. Ten minutes ago. Yesterday. It is not just in medicine but everywhere.”  This mindset, adopted by millions of Americans, is behind every ill-conceived practice instituted during COVID and also behind the increasingly destructive rush to “green energy.”

Reversing errors is not easy. Prasad and Cifu explained,

It is very hard to accept evidence that something you have done for patients, something that you truly believed was beneficial, is not useful. The evidence is even harder to accept when you have been well compensated for your work. Because of this, acceptance of medical reversals is never easy and opposition to them is usually passionate.

Thus, the medical administrative state won’t easily change. Yet, Thoreau asserted, government “can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it.” We have conceded too much. With our concessions, we have lost our humanity. In Thoreau’s words,

The mass of men serve the state… not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies… In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs.

We can regain our medical freedom by being more than “straw or a lump of dirt.” We can expand our comfort zone to go against the herd. The time is now to resist pressure from friends and family and to stop obeying authorities. Non-violent resistance is a viable recourse.

*****

This article was published by AIER, The American Institute for Economic Research, and is reproduced with permission.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Here’s How Biden Admin Destroyed Our Immigration Law thumbnail

Here’s How Biden Admin Destroyed Our Immigration Law

/in , , , , , , , /by

By Victor Davis Hanson

Since early 2021 we have witnessed somewhere between 7 million and 8 million illegal entries across the now-nonexistent southern border of the U.S.

The more the border vanished, the more federal immigration law was rendered inert, and the more Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas spun fantasies that the “border is secure.” He is now written off as a veritable “Baghdad Bob” propagandist.

But how and why did the Biden administration destroy immigration law as we knew it?

The Trump administration’s initial efforts to close the border had been continually obstructed in Congress, sabotaged by the administrative state, and stymied in the courts. Nonetheless, it finally had secured the border by early 2020.

Yet almost all of the Trump administration’s successful initiatives were immediately overturned in 2021.

Construction of the wall was abruptly stopped, and its projected trajectory was canceled. The disastrous Obama-era “catch and release” policy of immigration nonenforcement was resurrected.

Prior successful pressure on Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador to stop the deliberate export of his own citizens northward ceased.

Federal Border Patrol officers were forced to stand down.

New federal subsidies were granted to entice and then support illegal arrivals.

No one in the Democratic Party objected to the destruction of the border or the subversion of immigration law.

However, things changed somewhat once swamped southern border states began to bus or fly a few thousand of their illegal immigrants northward to sanctuary city jurisdictions—especially to New York and Chicago, and even Martha’s Vineyard.

The sanctuary-city “humanists” there who had greenlighted illegal immigration into the southern states suddenly shrieked. They were irate after experiencing the concrete consequences of their own prior abstract border agendas. After all, their nihilism was always supposed to fall upon distant and ridiculed others.

New York Mayor Eric Adams went from celebrating a few dozen illegal immigrants bused into Manhattan to blasting his own party for allowing tens of thousands to swamp his now bankrupt city.

But why did the Biden administration deliberately unleash the largest influx across the southern border in U.S. history?

The ethnic chauvinists and Democratic Party elites needed new constituents, given their increasingly unpopular agendas.

They feared that the more legal Latino immigrants assimilated and integrated into American society, the less happy they became with left-wing radical abortion, racial, transgender, crime, and green fixations.

Democratic grandees always had bragged that illegal immigration would create what they called “The New Democratic Majority” in “Demography Is Destiny” fashion. Now they slander critics as “racists” who object to left-wing efforts to use illegal immigration to turn southwestern red states blue.

Mexico now cannot survive as a modern state without some $60 billion in annual remittances sent by its expatriates in America. However many illegal immigrants rely on American state and federal entitlements to free up cash to send home.

Mexico also encourages its own abject poor and often indigenous people from southern Mexico to head north as a safety valve of sorts. The Mexican government sees these mass exodus northward as preferable to the oppressed marching on Mexico City to address grievances of poverty and racism.

The criminal cartels now de facto run Mexico. An open border allows them to ship fentanyl northward, earn billions in profits—and kill nearly 100,000 Americans a year. Illegal immigrants pay cartels additional billions to facilitate their border crossings.

Don’t forget American corporate employers. Record labor nonparticipation followed the COVID-19 lockdown. In reaction to the dearth of American workers, the hospitality, meat packing, social service, health care, and farming industries were desperate to hire new—and far cheaper—labor.

Human rights activists insist that the borders themselves are 19th-century relics. And the global poor and oppressed thus have a human right to enter the affluent West by any means necessary.

Many in the tony suburbs and in universities do not live anywhere near the southern border. So they pontificate on the assurance that thousands of unaudited illegal immigrants will never enter their own enclaves or campuses.

The result is elite-bottled piety—but not firsthand experience with the natural consequences of millions chaotically fleeing one of the poorest countries in the world to pour into the wealthiest. Without background checks, vaccinations, and health audits, legality, high school diplomas, English facility skill sets, or capital, the result is an abject catastrophe.

Polls continue to show that the American people support measured, diverse, legal, and meritocratic immigration as much as they oppose mass illegal immigration into their country and the subsequent loss of American sovereignty on the border.

They understand what the Biden administration does not: No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.

Ending illegal immigration now depends solely on the American people overriding the corrupt special interests and leaders who profit from the current chaos and human misery.

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Medical Examiner’s Office Source: ‘Only 1 to 2%’ of ‘COVID Deaths’ Were Really COVID thumbnail

Medical Examiner’s Office Source: ‘Only 1 to 2%’ of ‘COVID Deaths’ Were Really COVID

/in , , , /by

By Selwyn Duke

“Only one to two percent” of deaths officially labeled as caused by COVID actually were induced by the disease. The rest were labeled as COVID but actually had other causes.

So said an individual I spoke to recently, who I’ll keep anonymous, about the deceased people processed by this individual’s medical examiner’s office. I won’t reveal much about this person, who I’ll call “ME,” except to say that ME is highly trained and qualified and works at a major medical examiner’s office in New York State.

ME’s information is not revelatory. We’ve heard from many sources that COVID numbers have been inflated. Personally speaking, I also talked a couple of years ago to an employee at a NY hospital who told me, casually and as a matter of course, “They’re lumping all the flu cases in with COVID.” But it’s especially noteworthy and newsworthy when the information comes from someone such as ME, who’s highly trained, in a position to know and who reveals such striking numbers.

I pressed ME on his (I’ll use the masculine pronoun generically here; this doesn’t imply that ME is male or not so) claim. “You’re not exaggerating?” I asked. ME confidently reiterated his assertion: Many deaths his office evaluated were attributed to COVID — but “only one to two percent” actually were.

What were the real causes? ME mentioned ischemia, myocardial infarction (heart attack) and complications from diabetes as major culprits. He also said that there were a large number of suicides — presumably another negative secondary effect of the lockdowns and other irrational COVID policies — though these were not labeled as COVID deaths at his office.

ME did state, however, that sometimes a person will have died from something wholly unrelated to COVID — he mentioned a motorcycle accident case as an example — and his office will list the decedent as having been “COVID positive” (not a COVID death, though), even though he wasn’t, because this would enable the deceased’s family to receive financial aid for the funeral.

Related to this, ME mentioned how not only were hospitals getting more money from the government if a patient was labeled COVID positive, but that he believed funeral homes were also receiving funds for processing COVID-positive decedents, though he was unsure on this point.

Obviously, however, the monetary carrot will always corrupt a system: As is said, what you fund, you get more of.

ME doesn’t approve of the dishonesty at his office, of the gross manipulation of COVID numbers. But ME also mentioned that his role isn’t to sign the death certificates; it’s to provide the office itself with accurate information derived from his evaluation of decedents. As for the people who run things at this medical examiner’s office, ME wasn’t very impressed, describing them as fools (though ME used a different but synonymous term).

Lastly, ME mentioned something I’ve long pointed out: While with the flu, for example, the mortality counter is reset every year, this isn’t done with COVID. Rather, authorities keep a running count, continually adding on to the previous years’ numbers, so that the disease’s mortality appears especially frightening.

So what are America’s actual COVID numbers? Can ME’s one-to-two-percent estimate be extrapolated to our whole country? We don’t know. What’s for certain is that COVID has been grossly mismanaged and mischaracterized by people who would sententiously scold “Follow the science!” but were themselves following money and politics. In the process, this medical/scientific establishment has perhaps permanently discredited itself — and never was reputational destruction more richly deserved.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe or Gettr or log on to SelwynDuke.com

©2023. Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

Top Pro-Life Leaders Slam Trump for Calling Heartbeat Protections for Unborn ‘Terrible’ thumbnail

Top Pro-Life Leaders Slam Trump for Calling Heartbeat Protections for Unborn ‘Terrible’

/in , , , , , /by

By Mary Margaret Olohan

Former President Donald Trump is drawing fire from pro-life leaders for describing Florida’s heartbeat protections for the unborn as “terrible.”

“I think what he did is a terrible thing and a terrible mistake,” Trump told NBC’s new “Meet the Press” host, Kristen Welker, in an interview that aired Sunday. The former president was referring to Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signing state legislation banning the abortions of babies after a heartbeat has been detected.

Georgia, Ohio, South Carolina, and Iowa all have passed similar laws, though Ohio’s and Iowa’s laws are held up in court. Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia have almost completely banned abortion with limited exceptions, such as for preserving the life of the mother.

And to the chagrin of top pro-life groups, Trump also would not say whether he would support protections for babies after 15 weeks of gestation, suggesting that he would seek solutions to the abortion debate that both Republicans and Democrats could embrace.

“What’s going to happen is, you’re going to come up with a number of weeks or months,” Trump said. “You’re going to come up with a number that’s going to make people happy.”

While Trump’s recent remarks have provoked concerns from pro-life groups that he does not support strong legislation protecting life, he has previously been heralded as the most pro-life president in American history—and he will always have the lasting legacy of appointing three of the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade.

Trump also made history as the first president to attend the national March for Life in person, for appointing a slew of pro-life federal judges throughout his four years as president, for signing an executive order protecting infants born alive through botched abortions, and for significantly cutting Planned Parenthood’s federal funding.

But his newest comments sparked a strong response from pro-life leaders.

“Laws protecting the unborn are not a ‘terrible mistake,’” Alliance Defending Freedom CEO and President Kristen Waggoner said Sunday. “They are the hallmark of a just and moral society. Governors who protect life should be applauded, not attacked. And while we’re at it, men can’t become women. This is also based on a simple biological reality and one necessary for a just and moral society.”

Live Action’s founder and president, Lila Rose, decried Trump’s remarks as “pathetic and unacceptable” in a Sunday post on social media.

“Trump is actively attacking the very pro-life laws made possible by Roe’s overturning. Heartbeat laws have saved thousands of babies,” she said. “But Trump wants to compromise on babies’ lives so pro-abort Dems ‘like him.’ Trump should not be the GOP nominee.”

The pro-life organization Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America called for “every single candidate” to be “clear on how they plan to” save “the lives of children and serving mothers in need.”

“It begins with focusing on the extremes of the other side, and ambition and common sense on our own,” SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said. “Anything later than a 15-week protection for babies in the womb (when science proves they can feel pain) as a national minimum standard makes no sense.”

CatholicVote President Brian Burch said that the former president’s remarks have “sparked concerns among Catholics over whether he is committed to leading on this issue in the way he did during his first term.”

“Pro-life Catholic voters helped deliver him the White House in 2016, and a record number of votes in 2020,” Burch warned. “He cannot expect to win again without these same voters. Any Republican presidential hopeful must draw a clear contrast to the extreme, taxpayer-funded, unlimited abortion agenda of [President] Joe Biden.”

Some, like American Principles Project’s Terry Schilling, pushed for conservatives to hold their fire and wait to hear what type of protections for the unborn that Trump supports.

“Let’s at least see what national limit he backs before the hysterical takes,” Schilling said in a tweet pointing out that Trump had appointed three of the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade.

Daily Wire host Michael Knowles similarly suggested that Trump has “been extremely pro-life (e.g., Dobbs, 1st POTUS to speak at March For Life)” and has “proved himself capable of winning at least 1 general election.”

“Doesn’t excuse bad answers, but actions speak louder than words,” Knowles said.

Bob Vander Plaats, a prominent pro-life activist and president and CEO of The Family Leader, argued that “when a leader doesn’t have convictions on the most basic right of all, the right to #life, this is what you get.”

“Ugh,” he continued. “The ‘let’s make a deal’ message isn’t a win for babies, and it won’t win the #POTUS.”

The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh described Trump’s remark as “an awful answer from a moral perspective” and also “stupid politically.”

“You can’t win over Democrats by going squishy on this issue,” Walsh said. “Republicans have tried that brilliant strategy for decades and accomplished exactly nothing by it. Defend life clearly powerfully and unequivocally. That’s the only way.”

Trump did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Daily Signal. His former vice president, Mike Pence, told The New York Times on Sunday: “Donald Trump continues to walk away from the pro-life legacy of our administration.”

“There’s no negotiating when it comes to the life of the unborn,” Pence said. “We will not rest, we will not relent, until the sanctity of life is restored to the center of American law in every state in the nation.”

And DeSantis responded to Trump’s remarks in an interview Monday with Radio Iowa.

“Donald Trump may think it’s terrible. I think protecting babies with heartbeats is noble and just and I’m proud to have signed the heartbeat bill in Florida and I know Iowa has similar legislation,” the Florida governor said.

“I don’t know how you can even make the claim that you’re somehow pro-life if you’re criticizing states for enacting protections for babies that have heartbeats,” he added.

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

President Donald J. Trump says if re-elected he will carry out the ‘largest domestic deportation operation in American history’ thumbnail

President Donald J. Trump says if re-elected he will carry out the ‘largest domestic deportation operation in American history’

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

G-d willing!

Trump says he will carry out the ‘largest domestic deportation operation in American history’ if elected

Trump’s comments come as more than 4,000 migrants crossed the US Southern Border Wednesday

By Brooke Singman, Fox News, September 20, 2023:

Over 4,000 migrants cross US border in one morning

BREAKING: Former President Donald Trump says he will carry out the ‘largest domestic deportation operation in American history’ if re-elected in 2024.

— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 21, 2023

Former President Trump announced his plans to carry out “the largest domestic deportation operation in American history” if he is elected to a second term in the White House.

Trump, who leads the 2024 Republican primary field by a massive margin, delivered a speech in Dubuque, Iowa Wednesday evening, blasting President Biden for the “nation-wrecking catastrophe on our southern border.”

“Under my leadership, we had the most secure border in U.S. history. Now, we have the worst border in the history of the world,” Trump said Wednesday— the same day that more than 4,000 predominantly Venezuelan adult illegal migrants crossed the border into Texas.

Trump, in Iowa, said that if elected, his second term would begin by “immediately” terminating “every Open Borders policy of the Biden Administration.”

“Following the Eisenhower Model, we will carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” Trump said.

The former president said he plans to also “invoke the Alien Enemies Act to remove all known or suspected Gang Members, drug dealers, or Cartel Members from the United States”—an effort he says will end the “scourge of illegal alien gang violence once and for all.”

Trump also said he plans to “shift massive portions of federal law enforcement to immigration enforcement,” including parts of the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

“I will make clear that we must use any and all resources needed to stop the invasion—including moving thousands of troops currently stationed overseas to our OWN southern border,” Trump said, stressing that “before we defend the borders of foreign countries, we must secure the border of our country.”

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

DEMOCRATS’ INVASION: 35,000 Illegals Cross U.S. Border in Just 4 Days

SHOCKING VIDEOS: Trains, Massive Transports of Thousands of Migrants Shipped to USA, “It’s a Pipeline. It’s All Coordinated. It’s All Controlled”

US Sees 1,000% Surge In Migrants From Afghanistan, China

NYC School Kids KICKED OUT to Make Room for Illegal Migrants, “No More Room” For American Students

Biden Regime To Order Illegal Migrants to Stay in Red States, Not To Go To Blue States

BIDEN OPENED THE FLOODGATES: Tens of Thousands of Illegal Immigrants Overflowing Into Arizona Through Literal OPEN Floodgates in the Border Wall

RELATED TWEETS:

JUST IN: Fox News stops at bar in Bozeman, Montana.

Shocked to find out that out every single one of the patrons is voting for 47..

HAS AMERICA FINALLY HAD ENOUGH? pic.twitter.com/BIBxfERe9e

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) September 22, 2023

Lying liars lying about the border catastrophe that is gutting our beloved nation…pic.twitter.com/DcujC9D14r

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) September 22, 2023

WOW: Karine Jean-Pierre REFUSES to answer questions on the record-breaking 10,000 illegal immigrants crossing the southern border in a single day pic.twitter.com/7jUdCS7mHF

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 21, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

CANADA: Massive Anti-Woke/Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity March in Ottawa [Videos] thumbnail

CANADA: Massive Anti-Woke/Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity March in Ottawa [Videos]

/in , , , , , /by

By Vlad Tepes Blog

The story details can be read at at RAIR Foundation along with the full complement of videos and photos published so far.

Here are a few of the videos just to give a sense of what went on yesterday on Parliament Hill and the march around the Downtown core area.

This is the back of what could be called a teeming throng of people walking down Elgin St. I liked the guy with the Wokeism is Marxism sign. I think I did an interview with him. Will look and see if I can find it.

Like with all our Rumble videos, please click on the little gear on the bottom and select the highest quality bitrate offered to get the best look.

Here is the second interview with Kamel El-Chiekh we did after he noticed a few hundred union led, rabid leftists had arrived to counter-protest. The first one is available at the RAIR article linked above.

Here is a look at the crowd of protestors coming back to the Hill from the South West up Wellington. Also the leftists on the South side of Wellington. Try and compare these videos with the Maoist narrative attack materials the MSM spews at us about this and all related events.

A woman dressed in the manner of a religious Muslim, suggested her two sons come and offer me an on camera statement. This is the older of the two boys. He was very impressive. You can see both at RAIR.

Over the next few days hopefully we will get a chance to see more video from the MSM and do a more in depth expose of the nature of media in the United Socialist Provinces of Canada. To be clear: At this point the media is not even just enemy propaganda anymore. It is in fact dialectical weaponry. Very sophisticated engines of political warfare. We see it in the way they report, lie, misrerpresent, but mostly in the language they use to frame an issue. They do this in such a way as to even be able to show a person they wish to discredit speaking their own truth to a degree, while framing it in language to make him look like a Nazi camp commandant. Sometimes subtle just to create or confirm a prejudice in the mind of the observer, and sometimes more bluntly, getting an interview to follow which does it for them.

There is more on this and it will be published as the need arrises. The Laura Lynn interview with CBC mentioned in another post as an example. Please do leave your own thoughts and observations in the comments. Both if you were at one of these events, but also if you have seen some or a lot of the MSM reporting on the events and what impression you got from it.

RELATED TWEET:

I’m excited to announce the launch of the official Women for Trump Coalition!

President Trump is a champion for the dignity of women and trusts the science: there are only TWO genders Male & Female.

He also believes women are exclusively FEMALE.

JOIN: https://t.co/apd4pk9ovY

— Marjorie Taylor Greene 🇺🇸 (@mtgreenee) September 21, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by  Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Weekend Read: Populism, Politics, and Markets thumbnail

Weekend Read: Populism, Politics, and Markets

/in , , , , , /by

By Neland Nobel

Markets function within a complex framework of regulatory and central bank influence.  This regulatory and monetary backdrop is not the benign rule of “experts”  supposed by regulatory advocates in college textbooks, but rather often the product of raw entrenched political power.  Success is getting in sync with the flow of money and political power.  The “imperial city” in Washington is the lodestar, not open competition in the marketplace.

The influence of political power has several dimensions.  It is both internal political changes and external political changes that can influence markets.

In terms of domestic politics,  the old “spoils system” which existed prior to 19th-century civil service reform, was superior in the sense that when an administration came into power, it brought its friends and supporters, many of whom were not particularly talented.  When a particular party was turned out of office, the old bureaucratic friends had to leave as well and the new administration was able to bring in their own team.  And then, over time, they too would be removed and the cycle would begin again.

Getting a new team from time to time brought in new ideas and it allowed the administration to function without the hostility of entrenched interests held over from political opponents, who would use their administrative power to block new directions.  In a sense, it was more democratic.  When things changed at the polls, things changed in the bureaucracy.

The unintended consequence of professional bureaucrats is they can stay in place as political parties ebb and flow, giving birth to a permanent bureaucracy almost impervious to change.  This is further complicated when opposing political parties basically agree to the same regulatory philosophy.

But the world changes whether bureaucrats do or don’t change, thus political change does still seep through and has the potential to change the way markets have operated.

One of the aspects of the way things have run over the past several decades has been a close economic alliance with China.  US industry poured billions into Chinese development, based on the theory that as they grew rich, they would become more “liberal”.  Authoritarianism would wane, and having too great of a stake in the world economy, China would not become belligerent.

As China took over more and more manufacturing jobs, the US commensurately lost key knowledge and skills and has become overly dependent on China.  We agreed to give up our jobs and they agreed to buy our debt.

It has proven to be a very bad political and economic bet.  The US has become dependent on China and reshoring efforts are proving difficult.   China is massively building and modernizing its military and has moved into an alliance of sorts with US rival Russia.

Moreover, as the Wall Street Journal recently reported, US business confidence in China has fallen to a 24-year low.  Clearly, a major political shift is on with China, with MAGA Republicans initiating the change.

Meanwhile, Mexico has replaced China as the greatest exporter to the US, and China is steadily reducing its holdings of US Treasury debt.  Additionally alarming,  Mexico is descending deeper into the corruption of a narco-state.  Bilateral trade seems to be taking over from globalist pretensions.

This shift from China will be disruptive to the US and to China itself.  And when the two largest economies in the world are disrupted, the world economy will feel the change.

China has many problems, both political and demographic.  One of the most immediate is the ongoing unwinding of their massive real estate bubble.  After wobbling for two years, Ever Grande, a giant real estate development company has filed for bankruptcy.  More companies, though, are in trouble.  This is all part of the top-down, authoritarian model imposed by Chairman Xi as he moved his nation away from the market model back to the socialist model.  Additionally, it was not just central planning of the worst sort, it was central planning juiced with a giant debt bubble.

So among the political changes likely to influence markets, the troubles in China are likely to be significant.

In terms of domestic politics, we have had our own flirtation with top-down central planning. Since Obama, elites have sought to change the healthcare system and fight “global warming”. The adoption of Modern Monetary Theory by the Biden Administration, and its record acceleration of Federal debt to pay for all these schemes, has caused a spike in interest rates, which itself runs the risk of destabilizing our own domestic and international debt bubble.

The supply of bonds is rising sharply, but the FED has become a seller rather than a buyer, Social Security is a seller, and China has become a net seller.  Lower bond prices have meant higher rates, even as the FED attempts a “pause.”

Democrat policies of supply restriction and cost escalation,  have all but destroyed the dream of owning a house for many young people.  The ability to afford a new car also is fading.  The destruction of the American middle class is already creating an enormous political backlash with significant risk for Democrats.

A strategic realignment has occurred with supporters of small businesses, farmers, and nongovernment labor-tending Republicans. while Big Business, wealthy elites, and Rainbow members now favor the Democrats.

We recently completed two trips to rural Pennsylvania and rural Montana.  Trump signs are everywhere. It is fair to say, these people feel ignored.  They rightly or wrongly do not feel the current system is working for them.

Big business and the regulatory state have cross-captured each other.  Many business leaders would rather get a subsidy or loan guarantees than fight for profits against talented rivals. Those who benefit from the Green New Deal include car companies, power companies, and favored technologies.  Democrats are busy building cartels in healthcare, pharma, technology, and power generation and have turned their backs on small businesses.

As the government increasingly picks winners and losers, those picked as “winners” by the government can get a nasty surprise when they discover customers don’t agree.  We are seeing this play out among many of the EV companies.  We don’t want a car that is expensive, has little range, and is prone to spontaneously catch fire.

Democrat political enemies include traditional farming, ranching, timber cutting, mining, coal, and petroleum industries.  Tech companies are heavily favored by Democrats and often willingly become their political pawns.  Democrats hate private medicine.

No wonder there is a huge divergence between small-town America and the Big Blue cities that reliably elect Democrats.

The rise of multiple monopolies has birthed a new variant of “populism”, which does not look much like its 19th-century cousin, which had a socialistic slant to it.  Today’s populism could be described as formerly business-supporting conservatives joining forces with blue-collar workers turning against the policies favoring China and the crony capitalism cabal of the Green New Deal. 

Small business and labor traditionally frowned on monopolies.   Traditional free market advocates suggested it is only with government favors that monopolies can be maintained. That is still likely true.  However, now that industrial cartels have government favor, how do you change that?

Exactly how does one try to get market share from Google?

Oppressive regulation is increasing costs and very often, the government-sanctioned products are inferior and of poor quality.  The government now wishes to tell you how to wash your clothes, your dishes, and even how to cook your meals.  In the name of “global warming” the government creates dishwashers that run for a half day and don’t clean dishes.  If you can buy one that lasts five years, you are lucky.

The business community itself has further alienated the public with its constant panderings to ESG and woke culture.  In so doing, they have alienated natural free market allies and will soon discover that state-planning socialists are not the best partners for business prosperity.  Conservatives remain in favor of free enterprise but they no longer feel much loyalty to the current American form of crony capitalism,  especially large corporations.

As strikes spread throughout Hollywood and Detroit, conservatives yawn and suppose these “woke” corporations are getting what they deserve.

This change in politics likely means the end of an era for American business.  For the past 25 years or so, it has been a profitable joyride in China, a profitable alignment with the government, generous benefits of ultra-cheap money and low-interest rates, bailouts, and a record rise in corporate profits.  Great benefits have accrued to capital and less to labor.

The middle class feels it is getting screwed.  Loud minorities demand state reparations, increased benefits, and exemption from criminal activities.  It may have started with Brexit and Trump, but populist movements are ascendant in Italy and rising even in socialist Argentina.

Schools don’t work, public safety is collapsing, and the system seems to favor the racially aggrieved, and the sexually confused, while the whole thrust of government is one of constant interference in our difficult daily lives with institutional lying now the norm rather than the exception.

Populism reflects that the middle class does not feel the current system is working for them nor are the elites pushing such policies either concerned or aware of these problems.  Utopians have seized the reigns of power and want to change the climate of the earth, the relations between men and women, between families and the government, all while keeping as many people as medicated as possible.

Populists don’t trust the legal system, the medical establishment, the school system, the press,  and the universities.  They think the popular culture is often hostile to raising families.

Even the reputation of the military is falling, which explains recruiting woes. What happens when a large swath of the population becomes alienated from basic institutions?

One wonders if all the marijuana shops are there primarily to keep young, aggressive men in a haze of self-induced contentment and oblivious ignorance.

Above all that, the frequent bailouts and interventions to save various industries have lost considerable political support.  The next credit crisis will find much less support for bailouts and besides, given the current state of deficit spending, big huge new bailouts are financially out of the question.

All these megatrends are moving in different directions than they were previously and markets will have to go about adjusting to the new reality.  Republicans are no longer reliably “pro-business” while Democrats remain reliably anti-free market.  The Chamber of Commerce is out of touch.

Today’s “populism” is more than a revolt against the administrative state and the commercial cartels it generates.  It is a combination of economic frustrations and cultural alienation. It flips the 1960s on its head.  The middle class is now revolting against the “Establishment run by the elites.”

This revolt is likely to grow, and politicians, in the end, are more than anything opportunists. Markets will have to adapt.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

DEMOCRATS’ INVASION: 35,000 Illegals Cross U.S. Border in Just 4 Days thumbnail

DEMOCRATS’ INVASION: 35,000 Illegals Cross U.S. Border in Just 4 Days

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

STUNNING! 35,000 Illegals Cross U.S. Border in Just 4 Days

By: Tod Starnes, September 20, 2023

As many as 35,000 illegal aliens crossed the U.S. border in just four days, according to Fox News reporter Bill Melugin. He called them “staggering numbers.”

“That’s almost 9,000 every single day,” he said. “Astronomical.”

THIS IS CRAZY

AMERICA IS BEING INVADED pic.twitter.com/SXgZTaaqAy

— Clown World ™ 🤡 (@ClownWorld_) September 20, 2023

Click here to pre-order a copy of my new book, “Twilight’s Last Gleaming: Can America Be Saved?” President Trump wrote the forward.

Just a reminder that the Biden Administration is sending hundreds of billions of our tax dollars to Ukraine so that a foreign country can protect their border from invaders. Meanwhile, our own border has been breached and we are in the midst of a full-fledged invasion.

It’s imperative that Americans contact Congress and tell them to stop funding Ukraine and start funding the effort to secure our border and defend American sovereignty.

Read more.

WATCH:

This is video from Eagle Pass, Texas today.

Tens of thousands of unvetted, unknown male illegals are simply walking into America like they own the place.

This is dangerous. This is an invasion. This is evil.

Joe Biden is a TRAITOR.

Mayorkas is a TRAITOR.

There is no… pic.twitter.com/izulGZUF0v

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) September 20, 2023

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED VIDEO: SHOCKING VIDEOS: Trains, Massive Transports of Thousands of Migrants Shipped to USA, “It’s a Pipeline. It’s All Coordinated. It’s All Controlled”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

As Fentanyl Overdoses Rise, a Child in New York Dies of Exposure thumbnail

As Fentanyl Overdoses Rise, a Child in New York Dies of Exposure

/in , , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

Records concerning the fentanyl epidemic started being kept in 2020, and the latest numbers show that the issue is getting worse. According to Breitbart, August marked a new record of overdose deaths in San Francisco, with approximately three deaths per day due to fentanyl. As reported by The San Fransisco Chronicle, the city “is on track to see 845 overdose fatalities this year.”

London Breed, the mayor of San Francisco, declared the fentanyl crisis a “state of emergency” in 2020, and since then the problem has continued to worsen across the U.S. This week, in an at-home day care in New York City, a one-year-old boy, Nicholas Dominici, died due to drug exposure, with three other children hospitalized. While the tragedy is still under investigation, the presence of fentanyl has been confirmed. Grei Mendez and Acevedo Brito, the owner and tenant of the day care where the deaths took place, have been charged for murder, manslaughter, and assault and “ordered to be held without bail.”

Ashwin Vasan, the City Health Commissioner, said in a news conference, “I’m very sorry, but one of the things that my child care inspectors are not trained to do is look for fentanyl. But maybe we need to.” Otoniel Feliz, the father of Nicholas Dominici, shared, “In what mind does it make sense that you’re going to mix narcotics with children?”

In 2021, the U.S. witnessed more than 100,000 people across the nation being killed by drug overdose — the highest it had ever been in a single year. According to BBC News, over 66% of those deaths were directly related to fentanyl. As reported by BBC, a recent study revealed “virtually every corner of the US, from Hawaii to Alaska to Rhode Island, has been touched by fentanyl.” Experts say nearly “300 individuals a day [are] dying from overdose, and almost all of those are fentanyl related.”

Joseph Backholm, senior fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council, commented to The Washington Stand, “Certainly the consequences of sin have often lead people to medicate their pain through drug use. That’s not a new phenomenon, but it is evidence of sin.”

He continued, “The problem with fentanyl is that it’s killing people who aren’t trying to use it, like the children in New York.” For Backholm, this tragedy can be traced back to homeland security issues. “We have a completely open southern border,” he said. “Virtually anyone from anywhere can walk across the border into the U.S. … [It] is killing a lot of Americans and enriching cartels who are able to benefit tremendously from the human and drug trafficking opportunities it provides.”

In a reflection on how to respond to the fentanyl crisis earlier this year, The Christian Post’s Matthew Barnett wrote, “Light shines brighter when darkness hovers. We can see farther at night, out into the expanse of stars surrounding us than we can during the day. These truths remind us that we must hold onto hope during [the] fentanyl crisis.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

24 Years Wiped from Life Expectancy of ‘Fully Boosted’ Men, Study Shows thumbnail

24 Years Wiped from Life Expectancy of ‘Fully Boosted’ Men, Study Shows

/in , , , /by

By The Geller Report

A person who received five doses would be 350% more likely than an unvaxxed person to die in 2031, 700% more likely to die in 2041, and 1050% more likely to die in 2051. How much more will the new jabs steal?

There has been no mea culpa, no hesitation, no cessation of mass inoculations. On the contrary, the more people die or suffer lifelong health damage, the more it is ignored and denied.

24 Years Wiped from Life Expectancy of ‘Fully Boosted’ Men, Study Shows

Frank Bergman • September 13, 2023

An explosive new study has revealed that American men who have been “fully boosted” with Covid shots will suffer a staggering 24-year loss in their life expectancy.

Researchers have analyzed the official data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the UK government to determine the long-term effects of mRNA injections.

The study sought to weigh the balance of risk for the vaccines by establishing how long the negative side effects take to reduce over time after a person receives each dose.

However, the researchers found that the damage doesn’t lessen over time and, instead, it remains indefinitely, increasing with each shot.

The CDC All-Cause Mortality data has shown that each vaccine dose increased mortality by seven percent in the year 2022 compared to the same figures for 2021.

The data revealed that each year, every vaccinated person becomes more and more likely to die at a rate of seven percent per dose, per year.

This means that the mRNA vaccines and booster shots are a “slow-acting genetic poison,” according to the study.

The study also found that the human body cannot recover from any amount of mRNA injections.

So taking 2021 as the baseline, a person who received five doses would be 350% more likely to die in 2031, 700% more likely to die in 2041, and 1050% more likely to die in 2051 than an unvaxxed person.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED VIDEO: Dr. Janice Lindsey testimony about the mRNA gene therapy shots that increasingly appear to be problematic.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Border Expert Chris Burgard Details Biden’s Border Disaster that is Destroying America! thumbnail

VIDEO: Border Expert Chris Burgard Details Biden’s Border Disaster that is Destroying America!

/in , , , , , /by

By Defend The Border

Chris Burgard joins the Jason Burmas on America Media Periscope to discuss the release of Death County & the River of Broken Dreams, featuring former Director of ICE under President Trump.

WATCH:

RELATED ARTICLE: DHS admits that around 160 non-U.S. citizens on terrorist watchlist have attempted to cross into US in 2023

RELATED VIDEO: Trains, Massive Transports of Thousands of Migrants Shipped to USA, “It’s a Pipeline. It’s All Coordinated. It’s All Controlled”

EDITORS NOTE: This Defend the Border video is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Trump Promises to Pardon Pro-Life Advocates Jailed by Biden thumbnail

Trump Promises to Pardon Pro-Life Advocates Jailed by Biden

/in , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

Former President Donald Trump has promised he will pardon or commute the sentences of sidewalk counselors, pro-life advocates, and “every political prisoner who’s been unjustly persecuted by the Biden administration” on the first day he returns to office, he told the 2023 Pray Vote Stand Summit on Friday.

Trump also vowed he would prohibit transgender procedures for children and prosecute left-wing officials who enacted laws that facilitate children to run away from home and begin to receive transgender procedures. The 45th president shared these and other specific policies during his speech, which closed Friday’s proceedings at the conservative Christian summit, hosted by FRC Action. And he said, “Americans of faith are the soul of our country.”

Trump said he will overturn the Biden administration’s attempt to criminalize their political opponents — a fate the president says conservatives have in common. “Marxists and Stalinists in the administration got a Washington, D.C, jury to convict five pro-life activists who are now facing up to 11 years in prison for simple acts of protest,” said Trump inside the Omni Shoreham Hotel.

Five members of the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising — Lauren Handy, John Hinshaw, Heather Idoni, William Goodman, and Herb Geraghty — were convicted in August of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act over their protest at the Washington Surgi-Clinic abortion facility. “Under Biden, others are being sentenced to 10, 15, and even 20 years in prison for retribution for their political beliefs, while Antifa and other groups burn down cities like Portland, like Minneapolis. … They kill people; they loot; they plunder, and they go free.”

“To reverse these cruel travesties of justice, tonight I’m announcing that the moment I win the election, I will appoint a special taskforce to rapidly review the cases of every political prisoner who’s been unjustly persecuted by the Biden administration … so that I can study the situation very quickly and sign their pardons or commutations on day one,” the president said. “Never again will the federal government be used to target religious believers.”

Targeting believers threatens the very essence of the United States, said the former president. “For nearly 250 years, our nation has been propelled by the power of prayer and guided by the hand of God in Heaven. It was faith that led the Pilgrims across the perilous seas of Plymouth Rock. They came to Plymouth Rock, and that was a long, arduous, and deadly journey. It was faith that moved our Founding Fathers to change history forever and proclaim that our rights do not come from anywhere other than from our Creator. And it was unflinching faith that inspired generations of pastors and patriots, chaplains and soldiers, farmers, workers, laborers, and pioneers to make America the greatest country in the history of the world.”

“It was God-fearing patriots like you who built this country, and it is God-fearing patriots like you who are going to save our country,” Trump added. “Americans of faith are not a threat to our country; Americans of faith are the soul of our country.”

“Through four magnificent years, I was proud to be your relentless champion for freedom, for life, for liberty, and for the great biblical traditions of Western civilization,” he said.

With patriots on his side, “this election will decide whether America will be ruled by Marxists, fascists, communist tyrants who want to smash the Judeo-Christian heritage, or whether America will be saved by God-fearing, freedom-loving patriots like all of the people in this room,” said Trump. “We’re going to take back our culture. And we’re going to make America great again, greater than ever before.”

Persecution is a shared activity on the Right, said Trump, who has been indicted multiple times by liberal prosecutors. “The radical Left is coming after all of us, because they know that our allegiance is not to them; our allegiance is to our country and to our Creator,” said Trump. Under the Biden administration, America has become “like a banana republic. We’re like a Third World country.”

The former president then turned to a number of policies he plans to enact if he wins the 2024 presidential election, which would make him only the second president in history to serve two non-consecutive terms in office.

“Probably number one on my list … I will sign a law prohibiting child sexual mutilation — think of it, sexual mutilation — in all 50 states,” Trump said, expressing disbelief he had to address the issue. “They mutilate our children, and we’re not going to let that happen.”

He also took aim at “California’s depraved new laws that strip parents of parental rights and that encourage minors to be transported across state lines for sexual mutilation,” he said. “And we will prosecute those involved in this sick California scheme for violating federal laws against kidnapping, sex trafficking, child abuse, and the deprivation of their civil rights.”

Trump also promised to clear out the federal bureaucracy indoctrinating students in extreme gender ideology. “I will close immediately the Department of Education, and we will move everything back to the states,” Trump said to applause, repeating a policy embraced by Ronald Reagan during his 1980 landslide victory over Jimmy Carter. (Trump allowed, “We’ll keep a few people there just to make sure they’re guaranteeing they’re going to teach English.”) He endorsed school choice and promised to “sign a new executive order to cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, transgender insanity, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children,” as well as denying taxpayer funding to any school with a COVID-19 mask or vaccine mandate.

Clearing out the federal education bureaucracy constitutes one step of his plan to “totally obliterate the Deep State,” the hive of unelected bureaucrats who draft regulations and enforce, or refuse to enforce, existing laws according to their own whim.

Trump took pride in appointing three of the six Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision last June. The Dobbs ruling “moves the issue back to the states, which all legal scholars wanted on both sides,” said Trump.

The former president added that Democrats “are the radical ones” on abortion. “They’ll kill babies in the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth month, and they’ll even kill babies in some cases after birth.” Trump, who won more votes than any sitting president in history, said Republicans have to address abortion head-on, “and if they don’t speak about it correctly, they’re not going to win.”

The Supreme Court also won Trump’s praise for its ruling in Students for Fair Admissions, which eliminated race-conscious Affirmative Action programs in college admissions and reinstitute “merit-based education again.”

Trump invoked the Bible when he promised to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, because the world is perilously “close to World War III.”

“As the Bible says, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers.’ And I was a peacemaker,” said Trump, quoting the Sermon on the Mount. “We got out of Syria. We got out of Iraq. We defeated ISIS.”

The president held up his record on religious liberty, supporting the Little Sisters of the Poor, not enforcing the Johnson Amendment, ending “Barack Hussein Obama’s hateful and bigoted assault on faith-based adoption and foster care services,” and opposing religious persecution overseas.

On illegal immigration, Trump praised the “patriots” in the Border Patrol, whose hands have been tied by the Biden administration. “I will also use Title 42 to end the child trafficking crisis by returning all trafficked children to their families in their home countries immediately,” he said. Quoting actor Jim Caviezel’s dialogue in “Sound of Freedom,” Trump declared, “God’s children are not for sale.”

He promised to return to his fiscal policy of economic nationalism (especially against China), further tax reductions and regulatory reform, forecasting that the economic rebound will produce more revenue, as it did during his first term in office.

Trump also highlighted the importance of reliable news outlets. “We are a nation that no longer has a free and fair press. Fake news is all you get, and they are the true enemy of the people.”

Playing dramatic music underneath his speech, Trump highlighted the decline of the nation under his successor. “We are a nation that has lost its confidence, it has lost its willpower, and it has lost its strength. We are a nation that, quite frankly, has lost its way,” he said, vowing to reverse the damage in one year.

“We will take back our country with a righteous and magnificent victory on Election Day 2024.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pro-Abortion Activists Attack Another Church

In Fight for Parental Rights, Calif. GOP Should Follow N.J. GOP’s Lead

The Burden of Caring for a World Full of Suffering

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

ERASING GIRLS: Male crowned homecoming queen, beating out four other girls in Missouri school thumbnail

ERASING GIRLS: Male crowned homecoming queen, beating out four other girls in Missouri school

/in , , , , , /by

By Dr. Rich Swier

TERRIBLE. The left hates women.

BREAKING: Male crowned homecoming queen, beating out four other girls in Missouri school

By: Libs of TikTok, Sep 18, 2023:

Oak Park High School students in Kansas City, Missouri just got sent a message loud and clear: boys are just better at things than girls are. Even at being a girl. Tristan Young, a male student who identifies as a female, was crowned the homecoming queen this week. He beat out four lovely female candidates because actually identifying as the gender that you are is like, sooo 2010.

Believe it or not, this isn’t the first time a transgender student was named Homecoming Queen at Oak Park High School. Back in 2015, a different boy who identified as a girl snagged the title.

We spoke with a parent in the district who asked to remain anonymous and she was disgusted by the district’s actions. She told us, “I’m appalled by NKC Schools’ continued support of the LGBT agenda. NKC Schools says they are “Champions for All Students” yet by embracing radical political statements like this they not only indoctrinate children, but they are placing certain student populations over others. Having two homecoming “queens” that are boys is a disgrace to the NKC Schools community. I hope more parents, community members and district employees start speaking out and start protecting children.”

This insane gender rhetoric not only teaches women and girls that men do things better, but also that a man who identifies as a woman is somehow more deserving of recognition and accomplishments in women’s spaces.

Another parent told us, “As a woman, it breaks my heart to see these girls get passed over and a man stealing what is rightfully theirs. As a parent I’m enraged that the school district is celebrating this on all of their social media accounts (conveniently locking down comments). On the other hand I’m broken-hearted because I know the students voted for him. Although Kansas City is a liberal leaning area of Missouri it is still more conservative than most cities. I don’t know how we’ve reached this point or how to turn it around.“

Imagine a little girl who dreams of being crowned homecoming queen one day when she’s older. Fast forward to high school, she gets nominated. Yay! She knows that she might not win, but to lose to a guy? Seriously? What could be more insulting? And even worse, confusing.

Predictably, the district limited replies and hid comments. If they’re so proud of embracing this radical gender ideology, why are they trying to hide?

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Wisconsin school district defends offering kids guides to anal sex and sex kinks

How A Democrat’s Porno Sexcapade Could Sink The Party In A Swing State

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Wisconsin School District Defends Offering Kid’s Guides to Anal Sex and Sex Kinks thumbnail

Wisconsin School District Defends Offering Kid’s Guides to Anal Sex and Sex Kinks

/in , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

The district said the content passed the “selection guidelines.” It’s pedophilia, it’s predatory, it’s sick.

BREAKING: WI school district defends offering kids guides to anal sex and sex kinks, claims the content passed the “selection guidelines”

By: Libs of TikTok, September 3, 2023:Sep 3

Thanks to an email tip from a concerned parent, we did a deep dive into the books the Kenosha Unified School District is providing their students. What we found in their libraries and heard from their leaders is truly shocking.

So after sifting through their library, we reached out to the school with our findings: Our email to the district.

“This Book Is Gay” teaches students how to have gay sex and how to use a gay sex hookup app to meet up with others. It also includes a guide to sex kinks and fetishes such as peeing on each other and eating poop. It’s available as an eBook, students just need to login and can check it out digitally.

Sample pages from “This Book Is Gay” here.

Full guide to sex kinks, anal sex, sex toys, and more found in ‘This Book Is Gay”

“Let’s Talk About It” Is a guide to watching porn online and using sex toys with extremely graphic depictions of sex.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: ERASING GIRLS: Male crowned homecoming queen, beating out four other girls in Missouri school

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Acceleration of Inflation in the Second Half Has Begun, “Disinflation” Honeymoon Terminated thumbnail

The Acceleration of Inflation in the Second Half Has Begun, “Disinflation” Honeymoon Terminated

/in , , , /by

By Wolf Richter

Month-to-month CPI spikes, core CPI and core services CPI accelerate, despite ongoing massive health insurance adjustments.

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) jumped by 0.63% in August from July, the biggest month-to-month increase since June 2022. Annualized, this amounts to a red-hot 7.8%.

This jump comes despite the still ongoing ridiculous monthly adjustment to the health insurance CPI that caused it to collapse by 33.6% year-over-year. The September CPI, to be released in October, will be the last month with that adjustment; with the October CPI, to be released in November, it will flip, which will add upward momentum to the CPI readings. CPI, core CPI, and core services CPI have been understated significantly since October last year, when the monthly health insurance adjustment started, one of the biggest data distortions coming out of the pandemic (more in a moment).

With this month-to-month spike, the year-over-year CPI rate accelerated to 3.7%, the second year-over-year acceleration since June 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics today (green in the chart below). July had already marked the end of the period of “disinflation” when the year-over-year inflation rate accelerated for the first time since June 2022.

The “Core” CPI, which attempts to track underlying inflation by excluding the volatile food and energy products, rose by a still-hot 4.3% in August, compared to a year ago (red in the chart).

Given the narrower focus of core CPI, and the therefore proportionally bigger weight of health insurance in it, core CPI was even more distorted than overall CPI by the 33.6% collapse of the health insurance CPI.

Core CPI, month-to-month, was held down by the collapse of the health insurance CPI, and yet, it still accelerated to 0.28% in August from July.

Fuel prices will push CPI up further, even core CPI.

Starting with April, the year-over-year plunge in energy prices at the time, particularly gasoline, pushed the overall CPI increases below those of core CPI.

But on a month-to-month basis, gasoline prices have been surging all year – they jumped 10.6% in August from July – thereby whittling away at the year-over-year plunge as we went. In August, gasoline CPI was still down by 3.3% from August 2022.

Given how the gasoline CPI plunged in late 2022, we know that on a year-over-year basis, gasoline CPI will turn sharply positive later this year. The green line in the chart connects August 2023 and August 2022:

Gasoline accounts for about half of the total energy CPI. Note that gasoline, and energy overall, are still negative year-over-year, despite the sharp month-to-month increases. They will flip to positive, and become bigger drivers of CPI inflation over the coming months:

CPI for Energy, by Category MoM YoY
Overall Energy CPI 5.6% -3.6%
Gasoline 10.6% -3.3%
Utility natural gas to home 0.1% -16.5%
Electricity service 0.2% 2.1%
Heating oil, propane, kerosene, firewood -12.4% 8.4%

How fuel prices filter into “core” CPI.

Diesel has also been surging this year on a month-to-month basis. The price of diesel over time filters into the prices of consumer products that are shipped by truck and rail, as are nearly all consumer products. Jet fuel has been surging similarly, and that filters into products that are shipped by air, and into services via air fares. These products and services are reflected in core CPI, which is how core CPI reacts indirectly to rising energy costs.

The tougher second half has started.

We’ve been warning here about this for months while the media was touting the story that inflation was “vanquished” or whatever. We knew CPI would worsen dramatically in the second half for at least three reasons:

  • Energy prices won’t plunge forever, and in fact, gasoline prices began surging again.
  • The “base effect,” which pushed down year-over-year CPI in the first half, is finished.
  • The ridiculous “health insurance adjustment” that started with October 2022, will swing the other way, starting with the October CPI, to be released in November. More in a moment.

The collapse of the health insurance CPI.

The monthly adjustments to the health insurance CPI, which started with the October CPI last year, will swing the other way with the October CPI this year, to be released in November (I discussed the details a month ago here).

The adjustment pushed down the health insurance CPI every month on a month-to-month basis by 3.4%-4.3%, which has now caused the year-to-year health insurance CPI to collapse by 33.6%, despite maddening price increases of health insurance in the real world. I’ve called these monthly adjustments “odious” and “ridiculous” because that’s what they are. They’re one of the worst data distortions that came out of the pandemic…..

*****

Continue reading this article at Wolf Street.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

The FDA Has Gone Rogue thumbnail

The FDA Has Gone Rogue

/in , , , , , /by

By Robert Malone

Many of us knew this day would come, and now here it is. As of Monday, September 11, 2023, the FDA has provided “Emergency Use Authorization” for the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine boosters. But there is no public health emergency at this time. And the “boosters” being “Emergency Use Authorized” are designed to provide protection against the Omicron variant called “Kraken.” Which is on its way to becoming extinct, outcompeted by newer variants like Eris which have evolved even further to escape the antibody pressure elicited by the globally deployed leaky “vaccines.”

Prior versions of which boosters, by the way, have been shown to have been adulterated with high levels of plasmid DNA incorporating SV40 virus promoter/enhancer sequences. Which adulteration the FDA continues to ignore.

“Vaccination remains critical to public health and continued protection against serious consequences of COVID-19, including hospitalization and death,” said Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. “The public can be assured that these updated vaccines have met the agency’s rigorous scientific standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality. We very much encourage those who are eligible to consider getting vaccinated.”

But Biden, under congressional pressure, had decided and certified that the COVID crisis “national emergency” and ended on May 11, 2023, right? Sort of.

The administrative class at the FDA decided that they have the authority to interpret this in their own special way. Despite clear Congressional intent and the Presidential decision, the FDA responded with a series of delaying tactics. These are summarized in an “action notice” in the Federal Register titled “Guidance Documents Related to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), A Notice by the Food and Drug Administration on 03/13/2023”. At the time of the Presidential declaration, the FDA had 72 COVID-19-related guidance documents currently in effect. These are not law, they are administrative guidance, but often function and are enforced as if they are law. If you are seeking an example of administrative state overreach, this would be a good place to start. So, what is an agency to do? Issue an action notice in the federal register laying out new rules, functionally guidance on guidances.

So here are the new rules, as unilaterally determined by FDA administrators. They took those 72 COVID-19 related guidances and divided them into four tables, and determined what they would mandate for the guidances in each table.

Table 1 were those that would expire when the public health emergency (PHE) would expire.
Table 2 were those that would be revised to continue in effect for 180 days after the PHE declaration expires, then will no longer be in effect on November 07, 2023 (Tuesday).
Table 3 were those to be revised to continue in effect for 180 days after the PHE declaration expires, during which time FDA plans to further revise these guidances .
Table 4 lists COVID-19-related guidance documents whose intended duration is not tied to the COVID-19 PHE and that will remain in effect when the COVID-19 PHE declaration expires. In other words, by administrative fiat, those guidances listed in Table 4 will remain in place for as long as the FDA administrators wish them to remain in place.
And at the top of Table 3 (the ones that they will revise as they see fit and continue as long as they think necessary) is the following:

Did they actually revise FDA-2020-D-1137 between then and now? Did they do the work that they said they would do? In short, no. The guidance remains unrevised since March 2022.

What congressional law and language determines when FDA can issue EUAs?

From the FDA’s own website regarding Emergency Use Authorization–

Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use authorization is appropriate, FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN threat agents when certain criteria are met, including there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

So, basically, the FDA administrative bureaucracy self-determined that they could continue to bypass their normal (already lax) procedures for evaluating vaccine purity (including lack of adulteration), potency, safety and efficacy pretty much for as long as their hearts desire, at least until November 07, 2023. And that is the administrative basis used to enable the September 11, 2023 “Emergency Use Authorization” for the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine boosters. Will that authorization sunset on November 07, 2023? I very much doubt it.

Meanwhile, back at the Capitol dome, the leadership of the congressional gerontocracy continued to snooze, raise funds for the next election, and almost daily demonstrate to the world (during rare public appearances) their quite literal mental incompetence (in a strictly medical sense of the term).

The data clearly demonstrate that there is no longer a COVID public health emergency, and there are no human data demonstrating safety and effectiveness of these mismatched “vaccine booster” products.

World data:

What do the current CDC data show in the USA (total deaths)?

271 deaths per week, 38 deaths per day WITH COVID. In contrast, we lose 200 – 300 mostly young people per day to Fentanyl and other opiates. That is 1,400 deaths per week from drug overdoses. As if one 737 full of young US citizens crashed and killed all passengers per week. Five times the COVID deaths. If opioid deaths are not a public health emergency, then why is COVID an emergency?

The obvious answer is that it is not.

Hospitalization data:

Hospitalized cases are up in the USA. But deaths are down. Not surprising, as the majority of currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 virus are more highly evolved Omicron variants. Typically more infectious, less pathogenic, and better adapted to evade the narrow antibody-based anti-Spike immune responses elicited by these leaky vaccines.

Who are the ones that are being hospitalized? More of them are the ones that have received a Moderna or Pfizer Emergency Use Authorized mRNA “vaccine” product than have not. That is a fact long known by the US Government but hidden until internal government discussions about this were recently documented by FOIA request.

I infer that the real crisis here is that the data from all over the world are clearly demonstrating that some period of time after receiving a mRNA “Booster vaccine,” recipients are developing “negative effectiveness.”

What the heck is “negative effectiveness,” you may well ask? The term means that those who have received the product are more likely to develop COVID than those who have not been injected. And there are suggestions in the data that the period of time between injection and “negative effectiveness” is getting shorter.

Even if the “vaccine” products have zero rather than negative effectiveness, they certainly have toxicity risks, so why would anyone be willing to receive these products if they knew this?

The “vaccinated” are at higher risk for developing COVID than the unvaccinated. So the “vaccinated” need more “vaccines.” So they can become at yet higher risk for COVID (and other infectious diseases)? Somehow the Joseph Heller WW-II book Catch-22 comes to mind.

And why would the FDA provide “emergency use authorization” and the CDC recommend these clearly toxic products for children?

While speaking at a Thursday news conference for Gov. Ron DeSantis in Jacksonville, Florida, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, that state’s surgeon general, advised people to steer clear of the updated booster vaccine for COVID-19.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet approved the new vaccine — which is reportedly designed to protect against the BA.2.86 omicron subvariant.

“There’s a new vaccine that’s coming around the corner, a new mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and there’s essentially no evidence for it,” Ladapo said during the news conference, according to local news outlets.

“There’s been no clinical trial done in human beings showing that it benefits people” he said.

“There’s been no clinical trial showing that it is a safe product for people — and not only that, but then there are a lot of red flags.”

In terms of specific concerns, Ladapo warned that the updated vaccines “actually cause cardiac injury in many people.”

The state surgeon general urged Floridians to make their own decisions based on their particular “resonance of truth,” rather than on “very educated people telling you what you should think.”

“When they try to convince you to be comfortable and agree with things that don’t feel comfortable, [that] don’t feel like things you should agree with, that is a sign, right? That’s a gift,” he said.

Instead of relying on the new vaccines, Ladapo urged people to adopt healthy nutrition habits.

Just for the record, I completely agree with Dr. Ladapo. But I also recommend checking your vitamin D levels, and taking vitamin D together with Zinc supplements in alignment with your personal physician’s recommendations. And get outside. And don’t forget that stress and fear are immunosuppressive.

Maybe you should think about following John Prine’s advice and blow up your TV. The fearporn being promoted on television and corporate media is hazardous to both your health and your ability to make rational health decisions for yourself and your family.

Let’s discuss the data that the FDA cites. Here is their statement:
The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines approved and authorized today are supported by the FDA’s evaluation of manufacturing data to support the change to the 2023-2024 formula and non-clinical immune response data on the updated formulations including the XBB.1.5 component.

OK, what does that mean? Non-clinical immune response data? What it means is that they administered the XBB.1.5 (that would be Kraken) variant vaccine products to mice, drew blood, and tested the mouse antibody responses to the XBB.1.5 as well as EG.5 (Eris) and BA.2.86 (that would be Pirola, previously discussed here) viral variants to see if the mouse serum would stop the ability of these viruses to infect cultured cells. Neither of these viral variants (XBB.1.5, EG.5, or BA.2.86) presents much of a health risk. And they assert that they found that the mouse antibodies cross-reacted against Eris and Pirola in a virus neutralization test. However they did not bother to share those data with the public, so we have no idea of how convincing or even how rigorously controlled those studies were. But we are to trust that the FDA finds these studies involving mouse model testing using a method that has not been demonstrated to predict protection against infection, replication, or spread of this virus in humans. But the corporate media thinks sounds very sciency and so they breathlessly repeat the FDA and Pfizer statements about mouse neutralization assays as if they demonstrate that these “boosters” will be effective. But it is all a lie, a sleight of hand. This is not how modern immunological science is done. This is propaganda and marketing. And the willingness of the FDA to make the above statement clearly demonstrates that they are either 1) completely incompetent, 2) barking mad, or 3) completely captured. Or come a combination of all three.

Note that nothing in the FDA justification addresses the risk to human health posed by these viral variants. The FDA has completely avoided any justification for the use of the emergency use authorization pathway, rather than a more standard, traditional testing and evaluation process. Because they do not think that they need to. This provides yet another example of the arrogance of the current administrative leviathan.

Once again – VIRUS NEUTRALIZATION IS NOT A PROVEN CORRELATE OF PROTECTION. Back in the day, before 2020, if a vaccine company were so bold as to assert that a mouse virus neutralization assay (or any other lab test) predicted vaccine protection in humans without having proven that the assay actually predicted whether or not the vaccine would protect humans, they would be sued and blocked from making such false unsupported claims. But since 2020, this type of claim has become routine. The FDA has gone completely rogue. They completely disregard what was previously well-established global regulatory standards on this subject.

The updated mRNA vaccines are manufactured using a similar process as previous formulations. In studies that have been recently conducted, the extent of neutralization observed by the updated vaccines against currently circulating viral variants causing COVID-19, including EG.5 and BA.2.86, appears to be of a similar magnitude to the extent of neutralization observed with prior versions of the vaccines against corresponding prior variants against which they had been developed to provide protection. This suggests that the vaccines are a good match for protecting against the currently circulating COVID-19 variants.

Lies and falsehoods on top of lies and falsehoods. There is clear evidence that the manufacturing process is poorly controlled, lots are highly variable, and this poorly controlled process has resulted in significant adulteration of the products.

Furthermore, mouse-based viral neutralization assays do not predict effectiveness in “protecting against the currently circulating COVID-19 variants.” There is no evidence to support that claim. This is yet another case of substituting hope for actual scientific proof. There is no evidence that these mismatched boosters will prevent infection, replication, or spread of currently circulating COVID-19 variants. A “suggestion” is not a rational basis for “Emergency Use” regulatory authorization of these products.

The benefit-risk profile of previously authorized and approved mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is well understood as these vaccines have been administered to hundreds of millions of people in the United States.

That is a highly controversial statement. I disagree, Dr. Joe Ladapo disagrees, and regulatory oversight agencies from an increasing number of countries all over the world disagree. Just because the government and manufacturers have colluded to force hundreds of millions of people to accept these products (without informed consent) does not prove anything. Repeatedly stating a lie does not make it true. This is clearly propaganda.

The data demonstrate otherwise. The benefit-risk ratio is upside down. Little or no benefit, many well-documented risks. And immune imprinting. And negative effectiveness. And they DO NOT PREVENT infection, replication, and transmission of the virus to others. Herd immunity can never be achieved with these leaky vaccines. That was yet another Fauci (and Biden) lie.

And then there are the many analytical flaws in the cited data analyses. Which always seem to be biased in favor of vaccine effectiveness. For a deep dive into that, I recommend the following:

“The imprinting effect of covid-19 vaccines: an expected selection bias in observational studies” (Response)
BMJ2023;381doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-074404(Published 07 June 2023)Cite this as:BMJ2023;381:e074404 (article)

We need proper explanations for apparent COVID-19 vaccine negative effectiveness.

Dear Editor

A striking phenomenon regarding COVID-19 vaccines, referred to as ‘immune imprinting’ or the more specific ‘negative effectiveness,’ has been recently discussed here in The BMJ. 1 Referring to Chemaitelly et al., which indicated that those with 3 doses of vaccine were more likely to be infected than those with 2, 2 Monge et al. hypothesize that “the increased risk of reinfection in individuals vaccinated with a booster compared with no booster is the result” of a selection bias wherein those receiving the booster are those “more susceptible to reinfection;” a sort of counter to the hypothesized ‘healthy vaccinee bias.’ Apart from the article’s inconclusive conclusion that this phenomenon “may be fully explained by selection bias,” this hypothesis would not apply to all such studies.

For example, while it could be reasonable to suppose that people opting for dose 3 and beyond would tend to be at higher risk of COVID-19, and thus more prone to reinfection, it is not obvious that this would apply to the recent study on healthcare workers presented by Shrestha et al.3 This study reveals an even greater problem. The phenomenon is not limited to boosters but is also found when comparing those receiving 2 doses to those receiving 0. In fact, Shrestha et al. indicate that each dose up to 3+ resulted in increased infections. And there are many other studies showing this phenomenon, also with regards to hospitalizations and deaths, in addition to the now widely accepted rapid waning of effectiveness, when comparing the double-dosed to the unvaccinated, including another study with Chemaitelly as lead author.4 5 Several recently published papers also explain how counting window issues likely led to exaggerated effectiveness and safety estimates in both observational studies and clinical trials.6 7 8

The explanation offered up by Monge et al. fails. What we need is a proper explanation for perceived COVID-19 vaccine negative effectiveness, by the vaccine manufacturers or drug regulators. We need to know if this has always been the case or only since Omicron, if the effect is dose-dependent, if certain groups are more at risk, etc. Otherwise, the notion that the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines outweighs the risks is under threat. If the vaccines truly are negatively effective, it appears that the benefits do not outweigh the risks; there would be no benefits, and we simply add risks upon risks.

References
1. Monge S, Pastor-Barriuso R, Hernán MA. The imprinting effect of covid-19 vaccines: an expected selection bias in observational studies. BMJ. 2023;381:e074404. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-074404.
2. Chemaitelly H, Ayoub HH, Tang P, et al. Long-term COVID-19 booster effectiveness by infection history and clinical vulnerability and immune imprinting: a retrospective population-based cohort study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2023;23:816-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00058-0.
3. Shrestha NK, Burke PC, Nowacki AS, et al. Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Bivalent Vaccine. Open Forum Infectious Diseases. 2023;10:ofad209. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad209.
4. Goldberg Y, Mandel M, Bar-On YM, et al. Protection and Waning of Natural and Hybrid Immunity to SARS-CoV-2. New England Journal of Medicine. 2022;386:2201-12. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2118946.
5. Chemaitelly H, Ayoub H, AlMukdad S, et al. Protection from previous natural infection compared with mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 in Qatar: a retrospective cohort study. The Lancet Microbe. 2022;3:e944-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(22)00287-7.
6. Fung K, Jones M, Doshi P. Sources of bias in observational studies of covid-19 vaccine effectiveness. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2023;1-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13839.
7. Lataster R. Reply to Fung et al. on COVID-19 vaccine case-counting window biases overstating vaccine effectiveness. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2023;1-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13892.
8. Doshi P, Fung K. How the case counting window affected vaccine efficacy calculations in randomized trials of COVID-19 vaccines. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2023;1-2. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13900.

“Long-term COVID-19 booster effectiveness by infection history and clinical vulnerability and immune imprinting: a retrospective population-based cohort study”
Lancet Infectious Diseases VOLUME 23, ISSUE 7, P816-827, JULY 2023

In the seventh month and thereafter, coincident with BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2·75* subvariant incidence, effectiveness was progressively negative albeit with wide CIs. Similar patterns of protection were observed irrespective of previous infection status, clinical vulnerability, or type of vaccine (BNT162b2 vs mRNA-1273).

Interpretation
Protection against Omicron infection waned after the booster and eventually suggested a possibility for negative immune imprinting.

Interpretation

Protection against Omicron infection waned after the booster and eventually suggested a possibility for negative immune imprinting. However, boosters substantially reduced infection and severe COVID-19, particularly among individuals who were clinically vulnerable, affirming the public health value of booster vaccination.

Sources of bias in observational studies of covid-19 vaccine effectiveness
Kaiser Fung MPhil, MBA, Mark Jones PhD, Peter Doshi PhD

In late 2020, messenger RNA (mRNA) covid-19 vaccines gained emergency authorization on the back of clinical trials reporting vaccine efficacy of around 95 percent,1, 2 kicking off mass vaccination campaigns around the world. Within 6 months, observational studies reporting vaccine effectiveness in the “real world” at above 90 percent, similar to trial results,3–6 became the trusted source of evidence upholding these campaigns. While the contemporary conversation about vaccine effectiveness has turned to waning protection, virus variants, and boosters, there has (with rare exception7) been surprisingly little discussion of the limitations of the methodologies of these early observational studies.

The lack of critical discussion is notable, for even highly effective vaccinations could only partially explain the drop in rates of covid-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths by mid-2021. For example, by March 2021, cases in the UK and the United States had dropped roughly fourfold from the January peak, when the “fully vaccinated” population only reached 20 percent and 5 percent, respectively. At the same time, in Israel, cases took longer to drop despite a substantially faster vaccine rollout (Figure 1). The vaccination campaigns in these countries can thus only be part of the story.

“There’s been no clinical trial done in human beings showing that it benefits people… There’s been no clinical trial showing that it is a safe product for people — and not only that but then there are a lot of red flags.” ~ Surgeon General of Florida, Dr. Joe Ladapo

*****

This article was published by The Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Watch President Trump’s Speeches at the Concerned Women of America and Pray, Vote, Stand Summits thumbnail

Watch President Trump’s Speeches at the Concerned Women of America and Pray, Vote, Stand Summits

/in , , , , , , /by

By Dr. Rich Swier

President Donald J. Trump delivered two must watch speeches at two conferences in Washington, D.C. on September 15th, 2023.

The first was at the Concerned Women of America 2023 Leadership Summit.

WATCH: President Donald J. Trump Speaks to Concerned Women of America – 9/15/23

President Trump later spoke at the Pray, Vote, Stand Summit.

WATCH: President Donald J. Trump Speaks to the Pray, Vote, Stand Summit – 9/15/23

©2023. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Goes Scorched Earth On Jack Smith, Classified Documents Case

Here’s All The Evidence Connecting Joe Biden To Hunter Biden’s Foreign Business Dealings

RELATED TWEET: 

I’m thinking we have reached a point in our screwed up country where we can’t trust anyone running for office unless they have been arrested, indicted or impeached.

You will know they are definitely the right candidate for the job if all 3 of the above apply.

Wild times! #MAGA pic.twitter.com/cymtw0oH1X

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) September 17, 2023

Leaked DOD Memo Mandates Fitness Waivers for ‘Transitioning’ Service Members thumbnail

Leaked DOD Memo Mandates Fitness Waivers for ‘Transitioning’ Service Members

/in , , , , , /by

By Royal A. Brown III

Yes—for every single soldier, sailor, airman or Marine nondeployable and excused by DOD, someone who deploys has to pick up their MOS critical tasks—apparently this inescapable task alludes the woke DOD.

Completely erodes every concept of principles of winning wars.

Confidential Biden DOD memo reveals “transgender” service members can skip deployments and receive indefinite physical fitness/standards waivers

The Dossier is publishing the Pentagon memo for public consumption.

By JORDAN SCHACHTEL

The Dossier has acquired a new Department of Defense (DOD) memo that goes into great detail on the topic of “care of service members who identify as transgender.”

The document, which is not classified but has long remained unavailable to Americans, is being published here for the first time for public consumption.

The 34 page memo details the enormous perks granted to service members who identify as transgender.

At the beginning of his tenure, President Biden ended President Trump’s ban on people who identify as transgender serving in the military. Since then, the Biden Administration has granted more and more benefits to this cohort, leading to dudes like this being celebrated by the Defense Department.

Anyway, here’s some of the “highlights” found within the document:

  1. Taxpayer funded “care” for transgender service members includes:
    • speech/voice therapy
    • cross-sex hormones,
    • laser hair removal,
    • voice feminization surgery,
    • facialcontouring,
    • body contouring,
    • breast/chest surgery (“upper surgery”)
    • genital mutilation surgery (“lower surgery”).
    • Psychological counseling
  1. Service members who identify as transgender may receive a waiver for grooming and uniform standards.
  2. Service members who identify as transgender may receive an indefinite waiver for physical fitness standards. This waiver often becomes a de facto permanent situation, and the transgender identifying service member just has to renew the exemption request every six months.
  3. Service members who identify as transgender will be considered “non-deployable” for up to 300 days while taking hormones for their “transition” period. Again, given that these hormones are often required for life, this may render the transgender identifying service member as permanently unable to deploy.

Read more.

©2023. Royal A. Brown III. All rights reserved.

AAPS Study Says Government Mask Mandates Failed and Caused Harm thumbnail

AAPS Study Says Government Mask Mandates Failed and Caused Harm

/in , , , , /by

By Neland Nobel

The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, which represents independent doctors, has issued a new and important study.

Based in Tucson, the most recent study came out on September 12th and concluded that masks not only did not work, but their required use by health bureaucrats was actually additionally harmful.

Here is a partial rendering of their findings:

“Government recommendations and mandates regarding face coverings have been contradictory, provided to the public as authoritative without evidence, are in conflict with the available data, and neglect to mention any potential harm from the use of coverings or masks.

Concerning efficacy, in addition to the indisputable failure of mask mandates to prevent outbreaks of COVID, the Cochrane systematic review of available empirical evidence concluded that studies “did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks,” and  “[t]here were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.”

Concerning the potential for harm, there are at least 60 studies and reports that illuminate the downsides of masking and face-coverings in different scenarios and among varied patient groups. Examples of harm found in the peer-reviewed literature, include:

  • Prolonged use of masks is not a neutral event and in fact, can cause harm. “Prolonged use of N95 and surgical masks by healthcare professionals during COVID-19 has caused adverse effects such as headaches, rash, acne, skin breakdown, and impaired cognition in the majority of those surveyed.”
  • Findings indicate that wearing the N95 mask for 14 hours significantly affected the physiological, biochemical, and perception parameters in a negative fashion.
  • The possibility that masks hinder the acquisition of speech and language in children exists. “Overall, the research to date demonstrates that the visible articulations that babies normally see when others are talking play a key role in their acquisition of communication skills. Research also shows that babies who lip-read more have better language skills when they’re older. If so, this suggests that masks probably hinder babies’ acquisition of speech and language.”
  • Experimental data has shown “carbon dioxide content in inhaled air rises on average to 13,000 to 13,750 ppm no matter whether children wear a surgical or an FFP2 mask. This is far beyond the level of 2,000 ppm considered the limit of acceptability and beyond the 1,000 ppm that are normal for air in closed rooms. This estimate is rather on the low side, as we only measured this after a short time without physical exertion.”
  • Society requires facial recognition as a most basic component of interaction and communication. Studies in individuals with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) have shown that “Poor face perception in AMD is an important domain contributing to impaired social interactions and quality of life”.  Voluntary masking with no gain contributes to societal alienation.”

This most recent study comes at a time when mask-wearing is seeing a surge in use as Covid once again is becoming more frequent.

At The Prickly Pear we feel if a person wishes to wear a mask, even as an amulet to ward off evil spirits, that is up to the individual.  They are only harming themselves. However,  the scientific data does not warrant government-enforced mandates or compulsions imposed by private parties.

Although we feel mask-wearing should be permitted, it still is not recommended because the negative trade-offs are not offset by effective protection.

Mask mandates are a prime example of the reason people have lost faith in both government officials and the medical establishment which abandoned science, the Hippocratic Oath, and common sense, all for the approval and funding of the government.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.