Steve Kirsch
December 22
I wanted to start a placeholder article of examples of corruption and/or incompetence at our favorite 3-letter agencies. The lists will likely grow much longer over time.
Sadly, AFAIK, nobody in Congress is interested in looking at this. They all would rather look the other way and pretend there is no problem here. They refuse to discuss any of these points.
Feel free to suggest your favorite examples in the comments and I’ll incorporate into the main text. These are just to get you started. Hyperlinks will be added shortly.
FDA
Janet Woodcock, interim head of the FDA, promised to look into the Maddie de Garay paralysis (12-year old paralyzed in Pfizer 12-15 year old trial). Nothing happened.
We tried to get Steven A. Anderson, the top FDA official in charge of safety monitoring for the vaccines, to meet with any of my team members to go over the safety signals in VAERS. Dr. Anderson ignored all attempts.
The FDA claimed my VAERS death analysis was incorrect but could cite no specific error in the methodology or the data (since it used the CDC methodology it would be hard and they supplied the data). They won’t talk on the record about it.
The FDA rejected our Fluvoxamine EUA saying we lacked enough data. Funny how the workers at Golden Gates Fields racetrack could plainly see the drug worked and most of them lack a college education. Maybe the FDA should hire them instead? The FDA couldn’t cite a confounder or bias that could possibly change the result. If they aren’t corrupt, they are incompetent. This cost thousands of lives and we wasted a year to complete a clinical trial to prove we were right. Obvious to normal people. Not obvious to the experts at the FDA.
The FDA has claimed we are spreading misinformation, yet refuses to provide anyone to have a recorded discussion with us to set us on the right path.
They approved that Alzheimer’s drug that was so bad they stopped the clinical trials.
I’m sure the FDA will soon approve molnupiravir despite the fact that the clinical trial showed it didn’t work. How can they approve molnupiravir but reject fluvoxamine (which is now on the John Hopkins practice guidelines and will soon be on many others). Intentionally introducing mutations into viral RNA might create a more dangerous version of SARS-CoV-2, critics say. But most damaging was that “in the second group, there was almost no difference in outcome for those on the antiviral compared with those on the placebo.” See this Nature article on molnupiravir for more details.
CONTINUED AT:
stevekirsch.substack.com/p/proof-that-the-cdc-fda-and-nih-are