Big Tech's viral vax blackout
By Mark Alexander
The Demos' Leftmedia outlets and their Big Tech colluders are both aggressively suppressing reasonable questions about ChiCom Virus treatments and emerging hazards about the various vaccines. They are doing so under the now-ubiquitous umbrella of "fact-checking" social media posts — especially any post that hints at a treatment previously mentioned by former President Donald Trump.
To that end, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) was suspended from Google-owned YouTube because he posted a video that referenced evidence that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) might have had therapeutic benefits.
As you recall, HCQ is an inexpensive prescription drug dispensed primarily to fight malaria. It's been around since the 1940s, and it was first mentioned by President Trump on 19 March of last year — a mention based on research indicating it might help as a preventive or treatment. HCQ is not an antiviral, but it's a powerful anti-inflammatory, which a 1995 study by the National Institutes of Health determined was a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus. It is the inflammatory cytokine storm that fills the lungs of high-risk patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 and thus requires a ventilator. Many patients, particularly the elderly, never make it off the ventilators as the lung damage from bilateral pneumonia often results in irreparable damage and death.
Trump's reference to HCQ resulted in his being excoriated by the Leftmedia for spreading "misinformation."
Sen. Johnson dared mention a new HCQ study by researchers at the Smith Center for Infectious Diseases & Urban Health and Saint Barnabas Medical Center, who concluded that of 255 mechanically ventilated patients from early in the pandemic, "higher dose HCQ/AZM therapy improved survival by nearly 200%." The study has yet to be peer-reviewed, but there are other studies here and here affirming the potential benefits of hydroxychloroquine.
Early treatment is key to COVID-19 recovery, and Trump's use of HCQ may have been a factor in his rapid recovery from the virus last October. But as Johnson noted: "The fact of the matter is because we didn't have early treatment, I don't know how many thousands of lives, tens of thousands of lives lost that didn't need to be lost. ... It is a tragedy and blunder on the part of the health agencies."
We'll never know how many COVID-19 patients might have benefitted from HCQ as part of their treatment. But as we passed the 600,000 death mark last week, renowned New Jersey epidemiologist Dr. Stephen Smith estimates as many as 100,000 lives might have been saved.
But because Trump suggested it, the Leftmedia and social media platforms buried it — much as they did Trump's insistence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus likely originated in China's Wuhan P4 lab. Only now, 16 months and millions of deaths later, is the lab origin assessment making it into the mainstream media.
As Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, concluded, "Irrationally hating everything Donald Trump touched was not just pathological, it often became downright scary — and deadly — for Americans."
The social media silencing of Sen. Johnson coincided with another blackout — the suppression of reports of the relationship between the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines and myocarditis (heart inflammation), particularly in younger men.
That concern was the focus of a CDC emergency meeting scheduled on June 18. Understanding the increased incidence of myocarditis in ages 16 to 24 is particularly important given the growing chorus of secondary schools and colleges requiring vaccination as a condition of attendance. Likewise, many employers of young people may mandate the vaccine as a term of employment.
Notably, the country's largest teachers union, the National Education Association, though supporting vaccinations, is not demanding COVID-19 vaccination for teachers and students, nor is the second largest union, the American Federation of Teachers, pushing for that requirement.
Fact is, a substantial number of CDC and FDA employees, and those of Anthony Fauci's NIAID, have not taken the vaccine. Less than 43% of the population has been fully vaccinated, and states are now giving away free beer and dope, and millions in vaccine lottery winnings, to entice people to take it. (Yes, I note the irony of the lottery gambit to promote the vaccine gambit.)
At the very least, our government should determine whether forcing young people to get the vaccine could be more harmful to them than the virus itself.
But don't mention heart inflammation on Twitter. As Dr. Tracy Hoeg, MD, PhD, recently noted: "Post-vax myocarditis was clearly above baseline at the end of May. ... We are standing on shaky ground if we say the risk to otherwise healthy kids from Covid-19 is higher than it is from the vaccine." She then posted the study graphics directly from the CDC's website, and as a result, perhaps fittingly given all the Fauci/CDC flagellation, her post was marked "misleading." Hoeg responded: "Why is my tweet being labeled as 'misleading'? I'm discussing the @CDCgov's own slides. Was it because I was expressing uncertainty about vaccine risks vs. current COVID risks to otherwise healthy kids?"
Most assuredly that was the reason — but Big Tech doesn't want anyone questioning Big Gov, even when using Big Gov's own evidence as the basis for that question.
So, who will the social media arbiters of truth sight in on next? I predict Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a cardiothoracic surgery specialist who also holds a PhD in immunology and held teaching positions at Harvard Medical School and the University of Pennsylvania, will be subject to suppression.
According to Dr. Noorchashm, who is also concerned about forcing vaccines on people, particularly those who have already recovered from the virus: "I believe, as we've discussed before extensively, that vaccinating people who are COVID recovered in this emergency situation where we've basically very rapidly approved this new vaccine, is a colossal error in public health judgment. We're basically overriding the principles of medical necessity. So, in other words, if a person does not need or stand to benefit from a vaccine, or any medical treatment, they should not be given it because it only opens the door to harm."
Oh, wait: Google/YouTube already black-holed Dr. Noorchashm's interview with Tucker Carlson.
Forget I suggested that we should ask questions about the potential negative outcomes of mandating vaccines. Nothing to see here; move along.
Mark Alexander is the executive editor of the Patriot Post.