From the Brownstone Institute
The New York Times published an op-ed over the weekend entitled ”The Startling Evidence of Learning Loss Is In.” Here’s the second paragraph:
The evidence is now in, and it is startling. The school closures that took 50 million children out of classrooms at the start of the pandemic may prove to be the most damaging disruption in the history of American education. It also set student progress in math and reading back by two decades and widened the achievement gap that separates poor and wealthy children.
For anyone who has been paying even a modest amount of attention for the past 3 ½ years, the evidence is anything but startling.
People often ask me, and even more so since this “startling” piece hit the digital airwaves: “Don’t you feel redeemed?”
In fact, it’s hard to describe how angry this “revelatory” piece of writing makes me. More than 3 years too late, the New York Times has now given permission to acknowledge what was obvious from the beginning. But if you dared to say so in 2020, or 2021, or even 2022, you were smeared with all sorts of career-ending ad hominem attacks, including but not limited to: racist, eugenicist, ableist, science-denying alt-right Trumper, flat earther and sometimes Nazi.
So no. I don’t feel grateful that the New York Times has finally deemed this subject acceptable to talk about when the damage has already been done to both American children and those dissenters who challenged the fear-mongering, and data-denying mainstream narrative with actual science and facts.
Furthermore, this “journalistic” outfit fails to acknowledge their own complicity in these devastating results.
It was clear what would happen all along, but the New York Times failed to interrogate the issue and instead published “the science” as determined by Big Pharma press releases, teachers’ unions, and government leaders cowing in the face of public health bureaucrats.
My first writing on the subject was this in February 2021, but I had started pushing back from day one — March 2020 — in my own community, on news programs, on social media, and with open schools rallies, like the one pictured here from December 2020.
There were times I felt like I was going insane because it was all so patently clear what was happening and would only be made worse the longer schools stayed close: the learning loss; the disengagement from education overall; the depression and anxiety and suicidality due to severe isolation (often summarized as “mental health impacts”); the chronic absenteeism that would inevitably come because when you tell kids that their education isn’t important – isn’t a societal priority – well, they will believe you; the dropout rates; the graduating without being able to read; the abuse at home; the loss of community and hope.
But the more we sounded the alarm bell the more we were demonized.
Unsurprisingly, the poorest, most vulnerable children were harmed the most. Which is also clearly what was going to happen from the outset if you exercised even a modicum of common sense. Because, despite the wealthy hordes in Los Angeles and New York City shrieking about how We’re all in this together! –from their fancy balconies in the Hollywood Hills and the acreage of their Montana vacation homes — they also hired private tutors and formed learning pods with hired help to guide their kids and make sure they stayed on track. And, their children returned to their $60k a year private schools in the fall of 2020, a year before those who couldn’t afford the luxury of in-person education.
It was poor and low-income children who were left home alone to navigate “Zoom school” while their parents worked hourly wage “essential” jobs. And it was poor and low-income children left home to take care of younger siblings. Or find community – and trouble – outside of school. It was poor and low-income children who missed meals by not being in school, who didn’t have WIFI that worked, who didn’t have adult intervention and oversight that happens in school.
But no child was immune to the impacts. Just when adolescents are meant to be individuating from their parents, they were forced to be at home, alone, relying on screens for any sense of connection to their peers. They missed out on proms, football games, debate club, youth sports, graduations, and all of the small everyday milestones that make a teen’s life. And they were given no hope that it would ever end because it just kept going and going. In some states students experienced disruption to their schooling for as long as 19 months.
And even then, when they finally returned to school full time, they suffered under onerous restrictions including masking, distancing, testing, periodic closures, and no extra-curricular activities.
Furthermore, young people were made to feel like horrible monsters if they struggled with this isolation. They were called selfish grandma killers if they yearned for their friends or wanted to celebrate their graduations. They were made to feel shame for being human. Is it surprising that record numbers of young people were thrown into depression, anxiety, eating disorders, suicidal ideation, drug use, and sometimes, even suicide?
It’s nice that the New York Times has caught on now. But in this accurate oh-so-too-late piece, they fail to acknowledge their own complicity in extending and furthering the devastating, ineffective, and morally abhorrent school closures during 2020-2021, with restrictions to children continuing for more than a year after schools actually opened everywhere in the Fall of 2021.
They elevated the voices of those who furthered fear with a schools needs to be closed or else all the children and teachers will die hysteria.
Science reporter Apoorva Mandavilli persistently stoked fears about the danger of Covid to children and downplayed the significant risks of keeping them at home, “learning” on screens, isolated from their peers.
In October 2021, just as children across the country were heading back to school, Mandavilli exaggerated the number of children hospitalized for Covid by 14x, or 837,000 cases.
She continued to stoke unwarranted fear just when kids were going to get a semblance of their lives back, at a time when adults had been going to bars and dance clubs and sports stadiums for over a year.
Was her intention to encourage school districts to shut down again? Who knows. Certainly, she got the numbers way way wrong. She was so caught up in the fear-furthering hysteria — having participated in it for a year and a half at that point — she must have lost the ability to count.
Certainly, there was ample evidence that kids were at little to no risk, nor had they been since the very beginning. But any suggestion — with data cited — that Covid was not in fact dangerous to kids, was deemed “Covid denialism” by Mandavilli.
This is a science reporter for the New York Times, folks, not some Twitter rando. Her articles and Tweets carried real weight and influence.
The New York Times failed to interrogate the issue of closed schools during Covid in real time. They platformed fear-mongers and silenced, vilified, or just ignored dissenters, which included renowned doctors and scientists who dared to challenge the mainstream narrative like those featured in the pages of this publication.
The New York Times consistently published government and Big Pharma issued press releases as if they were journalism. They platformed the spokespeople of these entities and their paid influencers furthering unwarranted fear and packaging it as “the science.”
If a normie like me could read and interpret the data available since March 2020 and know that not only would closed schools be incredibly harmful to the most vulnerable children, but that their risk from Covid was thousands of times less than an elderly person, then certainly the science desk at the New York Times should have been able to do so.
Simply pushing the narrative that “everyone was at equal risk” was journalistic malpractice.
The news organization needs to go so many steps further than this op-ed.
They need to apologize for their untruthful, damaging reporting which gave cover to government leaders in refusing to open schools and teachers’ unions in refusing to return their members to the classroom.
They need to apologize for smearing those of us who challenged. We didn’t just suffer reputational harm and hurt feelings. We lost friends, our communities, our jobs, in some cases. And our voices were not part of the necessary societal discussion that needed to happen but didn’t. Because the New York Times presented one viewpoint — kids are at terrible risk and schools need to stay closed — as the undisputed “science.” As inarguable fact. Anyone who dissented was clearly an insane, selfish, and very dangerous lunatic.
Lastly, after apologizing to both the children harmed and the dissenters dragged through the mud, the New York Times needs to pursue this story relentlessly. So that children get the help they so desperately need and deserve.
And so that it never happens again.
Large new study finds COVID jabs carry increased risks of heart, brain, blood diseases
The study of 99 million jabbed people found ‘significantly higher risks of myocarditis’ after mRNA COVID shots, as well as increased risks of pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and other diseases.
A new COVID-19 jab study being billed as the largest to date has found increased risks of rare heart, brain, and blood disorders, yet the organization behind the controversial shots continues to defend them.
The study, published this month in the journal Vaccine, looked for 13 neurological, blood, and heart related medical conditions in 99 million jabbed people across eight countries, according to a press release from the Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN). It “confirmed pre-established safety signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” as well as identifying “[o]ther potential safety signals that require further investigation.”
“[W]e observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273” (both mRNA shots), the study says, “as well as pericarditis after the first and fourth dose of mRNA-1273, and third dose of ChAdOx1 [adenovirus-vector vaccines], in the 0–42 days risk period.”
“Another potential safety signal was identified for ADEM after the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine, with five more observed than expected events based on 1,035,871 person-years and 10.5 million doses administered,” it continued. ADEM stands for acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, an autoimmune disease that involves serious brain and spinal cord inflammation. “[H]owever, the number of cases of this rare event were small and the confidence interval wide, so results should be interpreted with caution and confirmed in future studies.”
The study also found a 2.5 times higher risk of the immune disorder Guillain-Barré syndrome associated with the AstraZeneca shot, as well as potential signs of increased risk of transverse myelitis, another type of spinal cord inflammation, associated with the viral-vector jabs.
It further noted that “[p]otential underreporting across countries may have led to an underestimation of the significance of potential safety signals. It is important to recognize the potential for false negatives, especially when detecting associations with lower confidence intervals below 1.5 that maintain statistical significance.”
Yet on February 12, GVDN also published a blog post doubling down on the dominant medical establishment positions that the COVID shots “reduce the incidence of infection,” despite the jabs’ failure to stop transmission, and that fears about dangers “are often based on misinterpretation of data, anecdotal evidence, or preliminary research that does not stand up to rigorous scientific scrutiny.” The author of the post, Helen Petousis-Harris, was one of 35 authors to whom the new study is credited.
The first in a series of reports by a Florida grand jury impaneled to investigate the COVID jabs recently concluded that COVID was “statistically almost harmless” to children and most adults and that it is “highly likely” that COVID hospitalization numbers were inflated, seriously undermining the presumed need for vaccines.
Follow-up reports on the shots themselves, which were developed and reviewed in a fraction of the time vaccines usually take under former President (and likely 2024 Republican presidential nominee) Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed initiative, are still pending. However, there is already a large body of evidence affirming they carry significant health risks, which the public health establishment and its allies in government and media have been largely unwilling to explore.
The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 37,100 deaths, 214,248 hospitalizations, 21,431 heart attacks, and 28,121 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of January 26, among other ailments. An April 2022 study out of Israel indicates that COVID infection itself cannot fully account for the myocarditis numbers, despite common insistence to the contrary.
Jab defenders are quick to stress that reports submitted to VAERS are unconfirmed, as anyone can submit one, but U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than overreporting.
A 2010 report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ (HHS’s) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) warned that VAERS caught “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events.” On the problem of underreporting, the VAERS website offers only that “more serious and unexpected medical events are probably more likely to be reported than minor ones” (emphasis added).
In 2021, Project Veritas shed light on some of the reasons for such underreporting with undercover video from inside Phoenix Indian Medical Center, a facility run under HHS’s Indian Health Service program, in which emergency room physician Dr. Maria Gonzales laments that myocarditis cases go unreported “because they want to shove it under the mat” and nurse Deanna Paris attests to seeing “a lot” of people who “got sick from the side effects” of the COVID shots but adds that “nobody” is reporting them to VAERS “because it takes over a half hour to write the d–mn thing.”
Further, VAERS is not the only data source containing red flags. Data from the Pentagon’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) shows that 2021 saw drastic spikes in a variety of diagnoses for serious medical issues over the previous five-year average, including hypertension (2,181%), neurological disorders (1,048%), multiple sclerosis (680%), Guillain-Barre syndrome (551%), breast cancer, (487%), female infertility (472%), pulmonary embolism (468%), migraines (452%), ovarian dysfunction (437%), testicular cancer (369%), and tachycardia (302%).
Leading COVID shot manufacturer Pfizer donated more than $8.5 million to political candidates, leadership PACs, trade associations, and party committees representing both parties last year, fueling suspicion as to why only a handful of nationally prominent GOP officeholders, such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Wisconsin’s Sen. Ron Johnson, are opposed to the company’s shot.
Funeral director says 25% of bodies now have ‘fibrous clots’ in arteries after COVID shots
Funeral Director John O’Looney
By Frank Wright
Despite attempts to alert authorities to the novel clotting, no action has been taken, with government policy seemingly avoiding investigation.
Reports have persisted following the rollout of the so-called mRNA “vaccines” of the incidence of white fibrous clots in the bodies of the deceased.
Despite repeated attempts to “debunk” the sudden and widespread appearance of these clots, evidence is mounting that they are not only present, but that the reason this novel pathology has attracted hardly any attention from the medical profession is that the dead in whose bodies they are found have one thing in common:
They have all been vaccinated.
Two recent video interviews featuring whistleblowers from the U.K. and the U.S. have now been published, in which each present evidence of the presence of white fibrous “calamari-like” clots in the corpses of the COVID vaccinated.
The claim that they occur in those who have received the mRNA injections is advanced by both men. One, John O’Looney, is a funeral director from Milton Keynes in England. He is the source of the shocking quote above, made in a recent interview with nurse instructor Dr. John Campbell.
Published on February 9, the video details how O’Looney began to notice the incidence of these novel fibrous white clots “around six months after the [COVID] vaccines were introduced.”
He states that midway through 2021 he noticed the first incidence of the white fibrous clots – six months after the introduction of the so called “vaccines.”
O’Looney says that around “25 percent” of all bodies he sees now have these clots present.
He showed a recent sample of these “arterial obstructions”: “They grow inside the arteries and veins and take the shape of them” – until those who develop them die, claims O’Looney.
So how are they different from normal clots – commonly called “thromboses”?
The clots we are seeing are different – traditionally clots are like jelly – you can wash them down the sink.
These clots are very tough – like calamari.
I have never seen anything like this. It is very tough, very rubbery.
I can’t see how this can be removed without invasive surgery.
We follow government policy
O’Looney says he has repeatedly attempted to alert the authorities, with no action taken as a result.
He related the recent postmortem of a young man who “died suddenly,” having discovered a “bright white” clot the “full length” of the leg of the deceased.
O’Looney claims he documented the strange clot with the local coroner by email. A later response from the pathologist said that these clots normally form and “there was nothing to report,” directing him to effectively “dispose of the evidence,” said O’Looney.
He added that the BIE – the national embalmer’s organization – has warned its members not to speak to him personally. The chief coroner has refused to investigate.
“When I emailed the chief coroner of England I did not get a reply,” O’Looney said. On a second attempt he received a “four word reply” from the secretary, simply stating “We follow government policy.”
O’Looney concluded that it is therefore government policy to refuse to investigate. “We have record numbers of excess deaths. We are trying to raise the alarm and nobody is listening.” Instead, O’Looney claims the authorities “are actively gaslighting people.” Deaths involving the presence of these anomalous clots are attributed to “thrombosis,” with no mention of any relation to the so-called “vaccines.”
O’Looney claims he has had “60 or 70 other funeral directors contact” him in support, saying “mortuary managers have told me thrombosis deaths have gone up 600 percent.”
Why have they not spoken out? “These people are frightened” O’Looney says, “I am just not frightened. I have a moral compass which will not allow me to be complicit.”
Against the debunkers’ charge that there is no evidence of any connection to the mRNA injections, O’Looney says he has asked “the loved ones of the deceased” whether they had received a COVID jab.
“They are all vaccinated.”
Nurse John Campbell, Ph.D., points out that this “new pathology” is something doctors would normally be motivated to investigate. O’Looney explains why this is not happening:
Where do the families go with it? The coroners won’t entertain it. I reported this to Thames Valley Police on April 28 of last year, incident number 1068.
I said I really need to speak to someone about [these deaths].
They would not even speak to me.
This has left him with “no faith in the police or in the system at all.”
Measures on suspicious deaths ‘diluted’
O’Looney says measures to monitor and record unlawful deaths may be removed.
“It’s a great time to do a murder,” he notes, as the measures to prevent corpses being cremated under suspicious circumstances have been “diluted – as a result of COVID, so they said.”
Formerly, he claims, two doctors would have to certify a cremation – this has now been reduced to one.
“I won’t stop telling the truth” says O’Looney, citing a report from a hospice nurse showing “turbo cancers” which kill within weeks of having no symptoms, dying of aggressive cancer “before they can receive a single treatment.”
“These people have one thing in common. They have all been vaccinated.”
Whilst Campbell says “This can’t be hidden much longer,” O’Looney warns of the “future these genocidal maniacs have for us.”
He says he has lost friends and even relatives over allegations he is a “conspiracy theorist.”
Yet far from being a lone voice, his data is “completely consistent with that collected by Major Tom Havilland,” as Campbell says.
Haviland carried out a second survey in 2023, with over twice the number of participating embalmers from across the U.S.
His study showed that over 75 percent of respondents were still seeing the anomalous fibrous white clots.
Evidence from US investigations
Alex Jones has published a video featuring U.S. funeral director Richard Hirschman showing vials containing clots identical to those displayed by O’Looney.
One of four funeral directors on the show, Hirschman is shown extracting one such clot from the jugular vein of a deceased and vaccinated individual.
“These are the strange white fibrous materials we are seeing.” One was “27 inches long,” he said.
“We used to never see clots in arteries – they are typically in veins. They are abnormal – rubbery – like a rubber band.”
In a second show, Jones interviewed Haviland himself, who said his interest in the issue was provoked by the controversial Stew Peters documentary, “Died Suddenly.”
“I watched that the night it premiered, the week of thanksgiving of 2022,” Haviland said. “I know there are some problems with the film, but at the thirteenth minute an amazing statement was made.”
Haviland refers to seeing the embalmer from the state of Indiana, Wallace Hooker, who on October 26, 2022, was briefing “about a hundred embalmers” at an Ohio Embalmers’ Association lecture.
“He showed them photographs of these white fibrous clots… and asked – “by a show of hands, how many of you are seeing these?”
Almost the entire room of 100 embalmers raised their hands – yes.
He continues, saying the embalmers “all agreed it was in the middle of 2021” that the clots first began to be noticed – “after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines.”
Haviland decided to investigate himself. The next day he called the president, vice president, and secretary of the Ohio Embalmers’ Association.
“The vice president corroborated” the claims, saying he had “seen the clots himself.”
In the video, Haviland goes on to present evidence from his two surveys in a presentation.
The surveys, conducted in 2022 and 2023, show details of admitted clotting side effects from the COVID shots, and that two thirds of embalmers he contacted in his first survey had witnessed the novel fibrous white clots in “up to 50 percent or more of their corpses.”
His studies, to which international embalmers also responded, show that the higher incidence of clotting is not restricted to the novel pathology of these white fibrous clots, but also shows a sharp increase in “traditional ‘grape jelly’ blood clots.”
Haviland was keen to corroborate the testimony of John O’Looney. When asked why more did not participate in the study or speak out, he too cited fear as one reason, with the reluctance of funeral directors to admit such side effects in vaccines they are likely to have compelled their own employees to take.
“Embalmers want to tell you what they are seeing only if they think they have permission” – from the authorities, says Haviland.
A lot of these [embalmers’] association presidents are directors themselves of funeral homes.
Would you want to participate in a survey showing these clots if you have mandated your employees to get the vaccine?
Haviland’s, Jones’, and O’Looney’s findings have been repeatedly dismissed and “debunked.”
The Poynter Institute is one leading self-appointed authority which claims to have disproven O’Looney’s reports. It says there is “no scientific evidence” for any connection between the clots and the mRNA injections.
Its purported rebuttal reads as a template for the maintenance of the COVID narrative.
The rebuttal –such as it is – immediately pivots from discussion of the evidence to warning people to take more of the so called “vaccines.” The strategy relies on attributing any alleged adverse effects of the “vaccine” to COVID-19 itself.
On February 10, 2022, the Poynter Institute “debunking” said, “Experts we talked to say there’s something to the claim about a greater incidence of blood clots, but they dismiss the idea that it’s linked to the vaccines.”
“What embalmers are noticing, they say, could well be the effects of COVID-19 infection itself, and those effects are occurring in people who are vaccinated and unvaccinated.”
Why is there no evidence presented by the Poynter Institute for its own claims? There is no attempt to investigate the abnormally high incidence of all types of clotting in the deceased in the period immediately following mass “vaccination.” Similarly, no attempt has been made to investigate the international incidence of vaccine side effects being reported by people like Haviland and O’Looney.
“It’s only anecdotal evidence, and there’s no scientific evidence to draw any conclusions,” said Jessica Koth, director of public relations for the U.S.-based National Funeral Directors Association in the Poynter article.
Why is there no “scientific evidence”? No scientists seem willing to study the case at all. As Campbell pointed out, it is unusual that there is so little interest in a “novel pathology.”
Poynter’s supposed rebuttal itself makes an unevidenced claim which, through repetition alone, appears to be held up as the truth by those who still believe that the “vaccines” are “100% safe and effective.”
“Generally, the vaccines available in the U.S. have been shown to sharply reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19,” their February 2022 article states.
There is no way of distinguishing between “vaccine” and viral harm as no effort was made to do so, which itself is a suspicious measure when promoting a novel treatment whose manufacturers are permanently indemnified from any resulting claims of injury or death.
It is noteworthy that the so-called “vaccines” were not initially advertised on television as they had not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. This, claim the debunkers, is a fact unrelated to the requirement to include warnings of known adverse effects.
The motives of those defending the “vaccines” from any connection to the emergence of these fibrous clots, other thromboses, and the many horrendous conditions noted by doctors such as Britain’s Dr. David Cartland is at one with “following government policy.”
What then is the motive of people like John O’Looney?
O’Looney claimed in his interview with Campbell that he is motivated only by “truth and honesty, and the desire to protect others.”
“We are raising concerns – but no one is listening.”
He is also determined to see those responsible brought to justice, as he said in May 2023:
I’ll be totally honest, I live now only to give my testimony in Nuremberg and see these people sentenced appropriately for their crimes against humanity and shame on those who took the money and went along with it.
They will fill the prisons they built for us.
Assisted suicide is never really about ‘choice’: here’s why
Federal Court Judge Pulls Canada Back from the Brink
For A Guy Who Can’t Win, RFK Jr. Has The U.S. Establishment Worried
President von der Leyen’s WEF Speech is Sheer Manipulation
Albertans continue to pay for government debt—despite budget surpluses
Trudeau gov’t ‘green’ heat pump scheme a dismal failure, records show
Kennedy, CHD win injunction in landmark censorship case against Biden administration
Opinion1 day ago
Trudeau’s Winnipeg Whitewash – A Masterclass in Diversion and Disconnection
COVID-1916 hours ago
DeSantis, medical experts review first Florida grand jury findings on COVID-19 policies
Alberta16 hours ago
Alberta looking to ban electronic vote tabulators ahead of next provincial election
Energy8 hours ago
Proposed legislation seeks to suppress speech about climate change and fossil fuels
John Stossel2 days ago
Dump the Apps! My Phone: A Privacy Expert Doesn’t Like What She Finds
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta declares early start to wildfire season
Justice1 day ago
Quebec teacher challenges Education Minister’s gender transition policy
Canadian Energy Centre1 day ago
Hubs are the future of carbon capture and storage: Why Alberta is an ideal place to make it happen