Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

COVID-19

Heroic Nurses in Horrible Hospitals

Published

8 minute read

From the Brownstone Institute

By BRUCE W. DAVIDSON

Even those who already know a lot about the recent man-made medical disaster may be shocked by the raw, firsthand accounts in this book of the horrors perpetrated at many American, British, and Canadian hospitals. Many do not yet fully realize that great numbers of putative “Covid deaths” were actually the result of deliberate hospital medical malfeasance.

What follows is a review of What the Nurses Saw: An Investigation Into Systemic Medical Murders That Took Place in Hospitals During the COVID Panic and the Nurses Who Fought Back to Save Their Patients by Ken McCarthy.

McCarthy interviews nurses, a respiratory therapist, and a public medical expenses analyst to reveal the terrible practices of many hospitals dealing with the Covid situation. His previous work includes the documentary HIV=AIDS-Fauci’s First Fraud, which explores an older debacle mirroring recent events – from the unreliable tests for HIV to the deadly, ineffective (but profitable) medical interventions undertaken to combat an overblown disease threat.

The book really helps the reader appreciate the heroic, vital role that nurses often play in hospital care. They have been indispensable advocates for their patients since the days of Florence Nightingale, whose quotes begin most chapters in the book. As one interviewed nurse puts it, “We troubleshoot to prevent errors…the value of a nurse is, her ability to critically think through these dangerous situations instead of just following orders blindly.”

However, during Covid, responsible nurses were unable to perform their advocate role in many hospitals. Under the cover of a medical emergency, many hospitals devolved into rigidly hierarchical, protocol-driven, inflexible, brutal institutions paying more attention to orders from above than to the well-being of their patients.

Nurses and others who opposed or questioned dangerous, irresponsible practices were ruthlessly punished and often fired. In other cases, nurses voluntarily had to quit their jobs because they were unable to continue witnessing the murder and abuse of patients.

In McCarthy’s words, “You couldn’t have created a better system if your goal was to use the doctors and nurses in hospitals to kill as many people as possible.” Nurse Kimberley Overton also remarks, “It was the complete and total medical mismanagement of Covid that was killing all of our patients.”

The nurses recount a multitude of examples of this “medical mismanagement.” They include the widespread use of the deadly, ineffective antiviral drug Remdesivir, the rejection of steroids and other standard anti-inflammatory drugs, and the common misuse of ventilators by unqualified staff. Such practices led to many unnecessary deaths, often later attributed incorrectly to Covid.

On top of that, many hospitals administered excessive amounts of potentially lethal sedatives such as midazolam, fentanyl, and morphine in order to induce passivity in resistant or anxious patients. However, these sedatives often had the effect of exacerbating their breathing problems, at times fatally.

Overton recounts one instance in which a patient received three different such medications in the space of twenty-nine minutes. At the same time, many patients were not administered medicines to prevent blood clotting, an obvious danger for bedridden, immobile patients.

The motive for these institutionalized crimes was money, plain and simple. Large amounts of money can be a very corrupting influence, as we can observe in various realms, including academia, which often receives huge amounts of money from foreign governments such as China.

Staggering sums went into the coffers of hospitals that adhered to the strict treatment protocols for presumed Covid patients. These massive funds came from a variety of government programs and agencies. For example, in the US in 2020, the CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) showered healthcare providers with $178 billion.

In his interview, A. J. DePriest reports, “HCA, one of the largest for-profit hospital systems in America, received about a billion dollars in CARES Act relief funds. Tennessee’s billionaire Frist family, which owns HCA, doubled their wealth between March 2020 and 2021, from $7.5 billion to $15.6 billion.”

To guarantee receipt of such funds, hospital administrators, acting in sync with federal bureaucrats, followed the written rules rigidly and rejected any contrary feedback. The only criterion was whether or not something was in the protocols. The interviewed nurses constantly heard doctors and others parrot this justification.

With the application of each approved medical intervention for a patient, hospitals received a separate large bonus payment from government programs. In particular, ventilators and Remdesivir, both highly dangerous interventions, procured large amounts of money for hospitals using them.

Aiding the profiteering hospitals, the UN, the mainstream news media, and much of the Internet helped to maintain this inflexible, destructive system by vilifying and persecuting nurses fighting for the lives and rights of patients. Nurse Nicole Sirotek explains how the UN and the WEF created Team Halo to mobilize mobs on social media like Facebook and TikTok (UN Under-Secretary-General for Global Communication Melissa Fleming has admitted working with Halo). Activists recruited and directed by Halo proceeded to attack dissident nurses and doctors on social media and besiege state nursing boards, which led to nurses having their licenses suspended.

The harassment did not stop at such things. Sirotek recounts that “people broke into my house, vandalized my car, and threatened to rape and murder my children. They poisoned my dog.”

Nevertheless, those interviewed by McCarthy did not respond as their attackers expected – by backing down. Despite their hardships, a number went on to form organizations like Frontline Nurses and create services to rescue many abused patients and their families from the hospital holocaust. In doing so, they demonstrated that they are the true heirs of Florence Nightingale.

The Kindle ebook version on Amazon is currently only $0.62 US dollars and 99 yen in Japan, certainly a bargain at that price.

Author

Bruce Davidson is professor of humanities at Hokusei Gakuen University in Sapporo, Japan.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Study finds Pfizer COVID vaccine poses 37% greater mortality risk than Moderna

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna

A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.

The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:

Study Overview

  • Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
  • Intervention: Two doses of either:
    • BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
    • mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
  • Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
  • Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
  • Main Outcomes:
    • All-cause mortality
    • Cardiovascular mortality
    • COVID-19 mortality
    • Non-COVID-19 mortality

All-cause mortality

Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.

  • Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)

Cardiovascular mortality

Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)

COVID-19 mortality

Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)

Non-COVID-19 mortality

Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)

Biological explanations

The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:

The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:

  • Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
  • Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions

Final conclusion

Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.

Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.

As the authors conclude:

These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canada’s health department warns COVID vaccine injury payouts to exceed $75 million budget

Published on

Fr0m LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

A Department of Health memo warns that Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program will exceed its $75 million budget due to high demand, with $16 million already paid out.

COVID vaccine injury payments are expected to go over budget, according to a Canadian Department of Health memo.

According to information published April 28 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Department of Health will exceed their projected payouts for COVID vaccine injuries, despite already spending $16 million on compensating those harmed by the once-mandated experimental shots.

“A total $75 million in funding has been earmarked for the first five years of the program and $9 million on an ongoing basis,” the December memo read. “However the overall cost of the program is dependent on the volume of claims and compensation awarded over time, and that the demand remains at very high levels.”

“The purpose of this funding is to ensure people in Canada who experience a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020 have access to a fair and timely financial support mechanism,” it continued.

Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) was launched in December 2020 after the Canadian government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.

While Parliament originally budgeted $75 million, thousands of Canadians have filed claims after received the so-called “safe and effective” COVID shots. Of the 3,060 claims received to date, only 219 had been approved so far, with payouts totaling over $16 million.

Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.

The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.

Additionally, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest showed that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.

Interestingly, while the Department of Health has spent $16 million on injury payouts, the Liberal government spent $54 million COVID propaganda promoting the vaccine to young Canadians.

The Public Health Agency of Canada especially targeted young Canadians ages 18-24 because they “may play down the seriousness of the situation.”

The campaign took place despite the fact that the Liberal government knew about COVID vaccine injuries, according to a secret memo.

Continue Reading

Trending

X