Just Say Yes

January 12

January 13

Obituary for Brittany Hall Perez | Hampton Cove Funeral Home

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Just Say Yes

  1. anonymous says:

    This kind of “not vaccine-related death” is what the medical media people should take seriously instead of Rachel Maddow and Rolling Stone gloating then getting embarrased for being surprised by a doctor’s lack of ethics…
    see the story here:
    https://trialsitenews.com/mercks-deadly-vioxx-playbook-redux-a-debunked-smear-campaign-against-its-competing-drug-the-fda-approved-nobel-prize-honored-ivermectin/
    https://trialsitenews.com/?p=66328
    Excerpt:
    On February 4, 2021, Merck, which is readying release of its new COVID-19 treatment drug, molnupiravir, issued a press release about that new drug’s competition, ivermectin.1 Merck itself had developed ivermectin, now off-patent, for human use, securing FDA approval in 1987, and distributed most of its 3.7 billion doses safely used worldwide since.2-4 It was thus curious that Merck’s press release about use of ivermectin for COVID expressed “a concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.”1

    Recently, many news reports5-8 picked up on Merck’s theme, lambasting the use of a dangerous horse de- wormer by gullible consumers. The most recent were by the BBC,9 Rolling Stone,10 The Guardian,11 MSN12 and others, about Oklahoma hospital facilities being strained with ivermectin overdoses, delaying other emergency care. The hospital system in question debunked the story, noting that it had not one case of ivermectin overdosing and that the doctor who fabricated the story hadn’t worked there in two months.13,14

    These false alarms about ivermectin safety, echoing Merck’s, are scientific nonsense. Ivermectin is FDA approved for human use,4 its discovery honored with the 2015 Nobel Prize for medicine, for “improving the health and wellbeing of millions,” with “limited side effects.”15 One of the safest modern drugs, it is well tolerated even at very high doses (details below). By a quirk of molecular biology, ivermectin binds to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and obstructs the morbidity of the virus.16-18 It thereby also obstructs Merck’s anticipated billions in revenues from its new COVID entry. As to Merck’s past playbook for such obstacles, consider its $410 million disinformation campaign for its deadly drug Vioxx,19 withdrawn in 2004.

    “Dodge Ball Vioxx.” In a scathing critique of Merck’s duplicitous promotion of Vioxx,20 Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief of Lancet, noted how Merck prepared a sales presentation, entitled “Dodge Ball Vioxx,”21 with instructions for dodging awkward inquiries from physicians. To the question, “I am concerned about the cardiovascular effects of Vioxx?” the answer that Merck instructed was: “DODGE!”

    “Neutralize,” “discredit,” “destroy.” Merck knew early of Vioxx’s cardiovascular risks, which resulted in up to 139,000 heart attacks and strokes, 30-40% of them likely fatal.22,23 Merck not only concealed some such deaths,22,24 but it systematically attacked those who warned of these fatal risks. It created a spreadsheet that named Vioxx critics and noted plans for each, including “neutralize,” “neutralized” or “discredit.”25,26 Merck also listed its staff assigned to each critic—an entire “task force” to one. On October 15, 2001, one Merck executive emailed another: “We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live.”1,26

    Regulatory Capture.27 Horton, the Lancet editor, noted the role of the FDA in enabling Merck’s Vioxx scandal. The FDA saw “the pharmaceutical industry as its customer,” not the US public.20 When an associate FDA director, David Graham, MD, blew the whistle on Vioxx’s deadly record, he was subjected to threats, abuse, and lies orchestrated by his FDA superiors.28 The FDA Commissioner who approved Vioxx resigned and then went on to become senior counsel for Merck’s PR firm.28 Horton summarized, “with Vioxx, Merck and the FDA acted out of ruthless, short-sighted, and irresponsible self-interest.”20

    Good journalists get extremely angry when they’ve been had. The major media do not generally spew scientific nonsense. It would appear to take a budget on the order of the $410 million for Merck’s prior Vioxx promotion19 to get incisive, respected journalists such as Paul Waldman of the Washington Post29 and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC30 to be duped into echoing Merck’s February PR claim that ivermectin is unsafe.
    End excerpt

    • rah says:

      When Merck still had the patent it began a program to provide Ivermectin “free” for the prevention and treatment of River Blindness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onchocerciasis in Africa. Of course there is nothing free and we here in the US were paying for it when we bought prevention for heart worm in our pets.

      I thought at the time that it was good evidence of just how ignorant so many Americans are about business that Merck thought it was a good idea to claim it was providing the drug for free out of their own pocket.

    • arn says:

      When Du Ponts patent for CFC’s ended
      CFC became the ozon layer killer.

      Seems to be a system here and that these billionaires know very well that they can rely on the presstitutes and swinetists whenever billionaires creare a scare scenario to save the world.

      As little
      revolving doors bonbon.
      FDA’s Scott Gottlieb left and is now part of Pfizers board.
      (a little bit like Homeland Securities Chertoff who pushed naked scanners like crazy and left to become ceo of a naked scanner company)

  2. Anon says:

    It is interesting how many healthy young people seem to be dying suddenly:

    Germany’s ambassador to China Jan Hecker dies suddenly days after taking office

    He appeared well on Friday night, when he hosted a cultural event at Germany’s embassy in Beijing highlighting the work of German artist Joseph Bueys. He spent the evening talking to many of the guests, including members of the China Academy of Fine Arts and journalists.

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3147693/germanys-ambassador-china-jan-hecker-dies-suddenly-days-after

    Maybe this has always been going on, but I am more aware of it now? (I am not even sure what the cause of death was above.) But I have a “feeling” there is more of this than usual?

    Wait and see I guess…

    • arn says:

      That’s too annecdotal,but watch out
      for a massive increase in cancer,allergies,infertitlity,birth defects and autism during the next 5-10 years.

  3. rah says:

    Everyone that took the COVID jabs is now a GMO.

  4. Keith Brandt says:

    Tony, I love your work but in this instance it “feels” as if you’re dancing on someone’s grave just as leftists clearly enjoy doing when an unvaccinated person passes from COVID. I think that this type of behavior, on either side of the debate, only engenders greater animosity and heaven knows we have enough contention in this nation and throughout the world.

    • Timo, Not That One says:

      Actually it’s a bit more nuanced than that.
      This woman was promoting an experimental gene therapy to “save lives” but ironically died the day after. The press and big tech have deliberately hidden this very negative story in order to continue to promote a treatment which they continue to mislead people that it is “safe”.
      An “unvaccinated” person who dies from Covid, chose not to take an experimental Gene Therapy treatment, not a vaccine. They also cannot be said to have died from “Covid”, since there is no evidence that such a virus exists.
      Furthermore, “What’s good for the gander is good for the goose.”
      I would like to see links where you have posted comments of this sort, criticizing those who are “dancing on the graves” of “unvaccinated” people.

    • Petr Beckmann, author of “The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear” wrote a standard response to “the” letter copied and sent him by so many hand-wringing “yes, but…” men and snowflakes. To paraphrase: If Tony were to lie, readers would sense the insincerity, and certainly he has earned to right to a little enjoyment now and again.

  5. Michelle Yow says:

    Love watching you drown in your hateful bullshit Tony. Fuck you. Really. Fuck you.

    • Archie says:

      And the irony award goes to . . . Michelle Yow! lol

    • John Sutcliffe says:

      The view of a ‘Woke’ with an arts degree no doubt.

    • Vegieman says:

      Hateful? You ever do a little self examination? What do you call the sentiments you just dumped here. I guess Tony let it through for those who read it to decide for themselves who is being hateful. Take a few deep breaths, get ahold of your misguided emotions, and read the response above from “Timo, Not That One” for an understanding of the spirit of what was shared in this post.

    • rah says:

      Oooh! You hit a nerve Tony! Good job!

    • kzvx says:

      Michelle Yow is drowning in her hate

    • Anon says:

      I am guessing Tony has permitted this comment for purposes of illustration? (I have to commend him for leaving it up.)

      So, with that in mind:

      If you ever wonder where comments like this (hateful bullshit) originate, verses the comments like: “The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” ~ Ronald Reagan

      Thomas Sowell does a good job explaining them in his book:

      A Conflict Of Visions Full Audiobook

      https://youtu.be/JslO9HwFDmg

      SOWELL: “In addition to these changing asymmetric relationships between the two visions, there is an enduring asymmetric relationship based on how they see each
      other as adversaries. Each must regard the other as mistaken, but the reasons for the “mistake” are different. In the unconstrained vision, in which man can master social complexities sufficiently to apply directly the logic and morality of the common good, the presence of highly educated and intelligent people diametrically opposed to policies aimed at that common good is either an intellectual puzzle or a moral outrage, or both.

      Implications of bad faith, venality, or other moral or intellectual deficiencies have been much more common in the unconstrained vision’s criticisms of the constrained
      vision than vice versa.

      Malthus said: “I cannot doubt the talents of such men as Godwin and Condorcet. I am unwilling to doubt their candor.” But when Godwin wrote of Malthus, he called him “malignant,” questioned “the humanity of the man,” said “I profess myself at a loss to conceive of what earth the man was made, ” and hinted that Malthus’ appointment as Professor at East India College was a reward for apologetics for the privileged.29 In the twentieth century, Friedrich Hayek’s landmark book, The Road to Serfdom, made him a moral leper to many, though in that book he was very generous to his adversaries, whom he characterized as “single-minded idealists” and as “authors whose sincerity and disinterestedness are above suspicion.”

      ——–
      Likewise, in the climate change field, a person opposing CAGW must be in one of the following three categories: #1] on the payroll of Big Oil, #2] doesn’t care about the environment or the world (thus are morally inferior), and are #3] the equivalent to those who blindly “deny” the Holocaust.

      After reading Sowell, you will understand that is what proponents of CAGW really believe about their opponents.

      A simple illustrative example of this was the whole Lance Armstrong doping affair. The Unconstrained Vision: a person with cancer overcame the disease and went on to become the greatest Tour de France rider in history. The Constrained Vision: the data and facts just don’t add up. But any one who questioned the “unconstrained narrative”, based on human potential, was either a “hater” or was “attacking the cancer community”.

      ——–

      So, Tony’s position on the Covid-1/vaccine issue, having been a software engineer, is the “constrained vision”… he has seen the limits of science and engineering, and knows what will happen to product quality and process corners when something as complex as a vaccine is developed and produced over a matter of days, weeks and months. The fact that we “need” a vaccine does not magically solve issues that arise in the normal course of product development… and is more likely to deleteriously “paper over” those issues. (This is why PhDs are one of the most vaccine hesitant groups. BTW)

      Tony’s position has nothing to do with “hateful bullshit” but is one of experience based caution and prudence.

    • Tel says:

      There’s no celebration here … this is a tragedy.

      Brittany Hall Perez was victim of a cognitive injury caused by endless dishonesty in the media … especially the large social media. I feel terrible about what happened to her, and hiding the problem will never make it go away, so her story needs to be told.

      If we can only raise awareness, future generations might improve their ability to think, to judge consequences, and achieve the bravery to speak truth to power during such difficult times. It’s the least we can do for the memory of Brittany.

    • Conrad Ziefle says:

      Michelle is upset about all the microaggressions you all have unleashed on her. When she says “flunk you!” she is just letting her soul speak from the grave that you murderous insensitive people have buried it in. FLUNK YOU!

  6. Chris Higginson says:

    Sad, a well meaning victim of Fauci madness.

    • Disillusioned says:

      Bingo. This C19 insanity has given me more compassion for the UN-woke. They are so deceived – many family and friends. My neighbor has had terrible chest pains almost every day after her two injections, and she had a bad flu (PCR test called it COVID, of course), was very sick after having received the second jab and couldn’t go back to work for two weeks.

      These people have no idea their immune systems are compromised from the jabs – at least those who didn’t receive the stealth placebos. (They are, after all, subjects in human trials of this experimental, biological, pharmacological test.)

      The spared lab rats must be jumping for joy.

  7. John Francis says:

    Commies are so controlling. They’ve had decades to prepare for this great reset.
    Since msm won’t publicize , someone had to.
    Unfortunately couple of my adult children and their children got the gene therapy.
    It’s so evil that they restrict early treatment with certain medications, including Mercks 1987 FDA approval of Ivermectin for human use. Repurposed but not poisonous.
    Breaks my heart that my family has taken….
    Michelle, you need to pray. Perhaps satan’ s minions have you in their hold.
    Get help soon.

  8. Raj says:

    I’m a supporter of your work but I don’t understand the purpose of this post or what point you’re trying to make. Seems like a distasteful low blow to me.

  9. Cancel me says:

    Other countries that have “zero covid” that credit the vaccines are not telling the hole story.
    Yesterday, Singapore let us all peek behind the curtain, by showing the a graph of age of hospitalizations:
    https://www.moh.gov.sg/images/librariesprovider5/covid-19-chart-(pr)/figure2_10sep2021.png?sfvrsn=221eed37_0

    Today there was 104 children under the age of 11, hospitalized with Covid.
    Tuesday’s chart, using the old format, showed there was only 116 Children on the entire Island of Singapore under 11 with Covid:
    https://www.moh.gov.sg/images/librariesprovider5/covid-19-chart-(pr)/fig-10-(7-sep).jpg?sfvrsn=9b24c311_0

    Singapore is taking Conid posit 4 year olds away from their parents and putting them in a hospital, for their own good… because “they are too young to be vaccinated”.

    Singapore adults are about 82% vaccinated. 85% of Covid Cases are among the fully vaccinated. The data is all there at http://MOH.gov.sg you just have to crunch the numbers… and they are not good for vaccines slowing the spread.

Leave a Reply to Disillusioned Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *