- Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, is enamored with dangerous virus tinkering, censorship and state-directed cyberattacks on civilians. He decries the benefits of whole food and nutrition and is a leading advocate for biomedical tyranny and the murder of independent thinkers
- In a professionally produced PR video for the World Health Organization, Hotez refers to vaccine safety advocates as “anti-science aggressors” and claims “anti-vaccine activism” has become “a major killing force globally”
- Hotez ignores data showing the jab does more harm than good. For example, a recent Cleveland Clinic study concluded that the risk of COVID-19 infection “increased with the number of vaccine doses previously received”
- Cleveland Clinic also found the bivalent COVID-19 booster was only 30% effective in preventing infection “during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine”
- In the fall of 2021, about 3 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were jabbed or boosted. By April 2022, 6 in 10 adults who died from COVID-19 were jabbed or boosted, and that remained true through August 2022, which is the latest data available
As Dr. Anthony Fauci steps down from his position as director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and top chief of the American bioweapons program, the scene is open for another word-wrangling science bungler to step into the limelight.
Seemingly vying for the position of lead propagandist for Big Pharma and the global Deep State is Dr. Peter Hotez, dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston — a scientist enamored with dangerous virus tinkering, censorship and state-directed cyberattacks on civilians, who decries the benefits of whole food and nutrition and is a leading advocate for biomedical tyranny and the murder of independent thinkers.
Vaccine Safety Advocates Are Now ‘Anti-Science Aggressors’
An M.D. who writes articles on Substack under the moniker A Midwestern Doctor recently addressed the hateful rhetoric being thrown about by Hotez.1 “Although I am used to seeing inflammatory approaches … being used to silence debates, I was nonetheless quite taken aback by the WHO’s recent tweet,” he writes.
The WHO tweeted out a video2 (above) featuring Hotez, in which he refers to vaccine safety advocates as “anti-science aggressors” — a term he coined in a 2021 article3 — and claims “anti-vaccine activism” has become “a major killing force globally.”4 According to Hotez, 200,000 Americans lost their lives to COVID-19 because they refused the experimental COVID jab.
Hotez goes on to claim that “anti-science now kills more people than gun violence, global terrorism, nuclear proliferation or cyber attacks” — a statement that makes anti-science sound threatening but actually absolves it, seeing how nuclear proliferation and cyber attacks have killed no one (at least not to my knowledge), and the death toll from terrorism is infinitesimal compared to things like preventable medical errors.
Pouring additional fuel to the fire, he makes the absolute statement that the anti-vaccine movement is a “far-right” political movement. “This is the new face of anti-science aggression,” he says, “so we need political solutions to address this.” In other words, he wants government to pull out the big guns and enforce a one-sided “consensus.”
Hotez Stirs the Pot With Flawed Assumptions
As explained by A Midwestern Doctor, the central claim in that video appears to be based on an October 2021 study5 that estimated 163,000 COVID-19 deaths “could have been prevented by vaccination since June 2021, when safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines were widely available to all adults in the U.S.” However, as A Midwestern Doctor points out, there are several problems with this argument:6
•“Since so many deaths not caused by COVID-19 have been classified as COVID-19 deaths, we don’t actually know how many people died from the illness (this study just assumed the official but inflated figure as accurate).
•In Pfizer’s trial, the survival benefit from the vaccine worsened with time (this has also been observed outside the trials), and at 6 months follow-up (where the trial was abruptly terminated).
•More people who were vaccinated died than those who were unvaccinated (which means that it is impossible that there could have been a net gain of life through vaccinating). Since this is the longest clinical trial that was performed on the vaccines, its conclusion must stand until a longer trial is conducted.
•The vaccines we are using have caused SARS-CoV-2 to rapidly evolve into variants for which it no longer offers protection. For this reason, the alleged benefits of the vaccine have had to be continually modified because it failed to meet each of its previously promised metrics (e.g., it does not prevent transmission of COVID-197).
•The study fails to account for the fact that national death rates consistently increased or stayed the same (but never decrease) following COVID vaccination campaigns …
•The estimate also fails to account for the fact that life insurance data has shown that there has been an unprecedented spike in deaths for age groups rarely expected to otherwise die, following the mass vaccination campaigns.”
WATCH: “Junk Food-Acholic” scientist wants anti-vax surveillance || Ryan Cristiàn
Research Shows COVID Jab Raises Risk of COVID-19 Infection
Hotez, the WHO and the PR firm that made that video also ignore data showing that the COVID jab increases your risk of contracting COVID-19 over time. For example, a Cleveland Clinic preprint8 posted December 19, 2022, concluded that the risk of COVID-19 infection “increased … with the number of vaccine doses previously received.”
Moreover, the bivalent COVID-19 booster was only 30% effective in preventing infection “during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine.”
Click here to view Cumulative incidence of Covid-19 (proportional) chart.
So much for “safe and effective.” The boosters provide minimal protection when well-matched to the circulating strain, and as its protection wanes, it leaves you at higher risk of infection than before. Deceiving people into taking this product? Now THAT’S anti-scientific aggression.
The Jabbed Now Account for Most COVID-19 Deaths
We also have U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data that confirm Cleveland Clinic’s findings. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF):9
“The share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen. In fall 2021, about 3 in 10 adults dying of COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted. But by January 2022, as we showed in an analysis10 posted on the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker, about 4 in 10 deaths were vaccinated or boosted.
By April 2022, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data11 show that about 6 in 10 adults dying of COVID-19 were vaccinated or boosted, and that’s remained true through at least August 2022 (the most recent month of data).
The data from this chart come from the CDC, which collects data on the number of deaths by vaccination status from 30 health departments (including states and cities) across the country.
In order to be counted as vaccinated, a person must be at least two weeks out from completing their primary series … Similarly, to be counted as having a booster, a person must be at least two weeks out from their booster or additional dose before testing positive. People who were partially vaccinated are not included in this data.”
The irony here is that the data Hotez cites in the video match an earlier KFF Health System report, but when he was presented with the updated dataset from the same source, now showing that 170,000 vaxxed Americans have died from COVID, he simply blocked the person who shared it.12
A Poster-Boy for Emotional and Physical Ill Health
Of course, maintaining a propaganda narrative demands that you ignore everything that might poke holes in it, and Hotez is no stranger to propaganda tactics. He’s been a relentless vaccine pusher and denier of vaccine-induced autism, even though (or perhaps because) his own child is autistic. As noted by A Midwestern Doctor:13
“Prior to this recent push to criminalize those questioning vaccine safety (which is evil), I viewed him as a comical individual who I genuinely felt bad for, and someone — who like many that do immense harm to the world — is simply controlled by habitual fixations they are never able to move beyond.
I have not done a deep dive into his background. However, everything I’ve seen is consistent with an unhappy, frustrated individual who frequently gets scammed by life and is both physically and emotionally unhealthy.”
Case in point: Hotez’s Joe Rogan interview (clip of which is featured in the video above), where he admitted being a junk food-aholic and intends to stay that way. Rogan, who is neither a doctor nor a nutritionist, actually ended up lecturing Hotez about the merits of a healthy diet. As noted by Dr. Pierre Kory:14
“In just a few minutes, Peter Hotez inadvertently shows the world exactly what has gone wrong with our medical system and why his endless push for more vaccines will never create health.”
Indeed, as Ryan Cristiàn, editor-in-chief of The Last American Vagabond, points out in the video above, Hotez nonchalantly discusses his unhealthy choices (and on the largest podcast on the planet) as if it’s perfectly OK to cast the foundations for health aside — because we have vaccines.
“I think he genuinely, to some degree, doesn’t understand why that’s so stupid,” Cristiàn says. “But on the other side of it, there’s obviously a push to make it about, ‘that’s not real health [i.e., food and lifestyle], vaccines are real health.’ It’s just this alarming undertone.”
What’s in a Vaccine?
In that Rogan interview,15 Hotez also makes the ridiculously unscientific claim that vaccines contain just antigens in saline, basically mimicking an advertisement by the Colorado department of health (click here to view Covid Vaccine Ingredients). Anyone who knows anything about vaccines — especially the COVID shot — can see how utterly and shamefully deceptive this is.
Another gross piece of propaganda was recently put out by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (video16 below). The ad chastises the West for withholding COVID shots from Africa, resulting in it having one of the lowest jab rates in the world.
Set three years into the future, it claims the virus kept mutating into ever more dangerous variants, which is the complete opposite of what’s been happening in the real world. It portrays Africa as a continent ravaged by COVID-19 due to lack of COVID shots, yet in the real world, Africa has fared far better in terms of cases and deaths than highly-jabbed nations. Frankly, it’s so distorted and contrary to facts, it’s hard to watch.
— Wittgenstein (@backtolife_2023) December 13, 2022
Hotez Implicated in Creation of Chimeric Coronavirus
Since the beginning of the COVID outbreak, Hotez has repeatedly accused those who disagree with him of committing a hate crime, which is a rather infantile defense mechanism. It’s quite typical for people who know they have no grounds for their argument to resort to name-calling and threats instead.
Not only has he called on government to use its military and intelligence forces to quash public discussion about COVID jab dangers, he’s also been a vocal defender of the natural origin theory, dismissing evidence of a lab leak as pure fiction and conspiracy theory.
This too is an example of that same defense mechanism. It was recently revealed that Hotez funded risky gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in Wuhan, China, so no wonder he wanted people to shut up about the possibility of the virus being a lab creation. His own work might be implicated in its creation. As reported by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK):17
“While casting concerns about Wuhan’s labs as ‘fringe,’ Hotez has not mentioned his own connection to a project involving a laboratory-generated chimeric SARS-related coronavirus that has come under Congress’ microscope. The project was helmed by Zhengli Shi, a senior scientist and ‘virus hunter’ at the Wuhan Institute of Virology nicknamed the ‘Bat Lady.’
As part of his NIH grant, Hotez subcontracted funding for research on combined or ‘chimeric’ coronaviruses, a scientific paper18 shows. Hotez’s grant19 underwrote two of Shi’s collaborators on the project.
In the 2017 paper20 co-funded by Hotez, Shi and her colleagues generated a recombinant virus from two SARS-related coronaviruses: ‘rWIV1-SHC014S.’ It’s not clear whether the paper co-funded by Hotez should have been stopped under a temporary ‘pause’ on gain-of-function work before 2017.
However, some independent biosecurity experts have said research on this chimeric virus in some ways epitomizes lapses in NIH oversight of risky research in the years before the COVID-19 pandemic.
A prior study21 of one of the coronaviruses that comprised the chimera, WIV1, found it to be ‘poised for human emergence.’ Another prior paper22 on the other coronavirus, SHC014, stated that its future study in lab-generated viruses may be ‘too risky to pursue.’
‘The work here should have been at the very least, heavily scrutinized,’ said David Relman, a Stanford microbiologist and biosecurity expert. ‘This work should have been heavily reviewed for [gain-of-function], and probably should have been subject to the pause prior to December 2017.’”
Hotez, One of the Most Shockingly Hateful People in Medicine
Hotez has made headlines a number of times through the years, typically delivering some kind of hateful rhetoric. He’s publicly stated he wants to “snuff out” vaccine skeptics,23 for example, and in May 2021 called for cyberwarfare measures to be deployed against people who share vaccine safety information.24
Hotez has repeatedly spewed vitriol at parents of vaccine-injured children and called for physical harm and imprisonment of people who don’t agree with the one-size-fits-all vaccine agenda, so it was rather funny when he whined and complained about getting bombarded with “anti-vaxx hate speech” in response to his cyberwarfare call.25
Hotez is not above casting an evil eye on other scientists either. As reported by journalist Paul Thacker in an August 9, 2022, Substack article titled, “Peter Hotez Sees Aggression Everywhere But in the Mirror”:26
“Patrolling scientific discourse, Hotez has a knack for discovering ‘antiscience’ in anyone who disagrees with him. Jeffrey Sachs, economics professor at Columbia University and chair of an international commission on COVID-19, charged in a wide-ranging interview27 last week that the National Institutes of Health and allied scientists were impeding an investigation into how the COVID-19 pandemic started …
Hotez went on the assault, tweeting that Sachs, as leader of the Lancet Commission, did not represent the views of science. Much like a Pentagon general wrapping himself in freedom and the flag to demand more federal monies for another foreign war … Hotez has been shrouding himself in the mantle of science to denigrate anyone who questions taxpayer funding for dangerous virus research by the National Institutes of Health.”
What Is Hotez Really Fighting For?
In his article,28 Thacker goes on to review several other bizarre incidences involving Hotez. For example, he referred to the scientific experts invited to testify before Congress as “fringe elements” testifying and promoting “outlandish conspiracies.” So much for Ph.D.s and med school. He also accused Sen. Rand Paul of promoting conspiracies.
Here’s the take-home: The reason Hotez rails against “anti-science” is because he can sense the danger the research community and vaccine industry are in.
If SARS-CoV-2 is conclusively proven to be a lab creation, it would put a massive spotlight on scientists involved in dual purpose viral research. Gain-of-function research may be banned altogether (as it should), which would sink many a career, including his own.
Similarly, public acknowledgement that the COVID jabs are a public health disaster would permanently and perhaps lethally injure the vaccine industry. So, all that hateful rhetoric? It really comes down to protecting self-serving interests.
Sources and References
EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.