gonchar/Getty Images

Horowitz: The more you vax, the more you … ?

At 234 doses administered per 100 people, Portugal is the most vaccinated large country in Europe. Yet as of May 17, according to Our World in Data, Portugal had the highest COVID case rate in Europe and the second highest in the world behind Taiwan. This is after 94% of the population have had at least one dose, and 62%, which encompasses anyone remotely at risk for the virus, got boosters. And unlike Taiwan, which never really had much COVID until now, so there’s little natural immunity, Portugal already got its fair share of cases a few months ago.

At some point, we need to have a dialogue not just about the ineffectiveness of the shots, but something much more concerning. It’s not just the negative efficacy against cases that should bother us. We were all told that the shots, despite their plethora of potentially deadly side effects, still protected against critical illness from COVID. However, again and again we are seeing the most vaccinated countries having their worst death curves (not just case curves) precisely after having boosted their population and with a variant that is much less deadly than some of the prior ones.

Iceland, for example, is by far the current leader in COVID deaths. At 12.8 deaths per million, the country now has a much higher death rate than America during the worst of the winter 2021 wave. And as we all know, America performed very poorly.

Sure, overall, Iceland has still fared much better than the U.S., but the obvious question is why is the country experiencing all its deaths now, after everyone is boosted and for a milder variant? Until early January 2022, Iceland recorded just 39 COVID deaths. The country skated by the pandemic better than any other European country and better than almost any country in the world, even with the particularly vicious Delta variant. How is it that Icelanders had three-quarters of their deaths all in the past few months, after every single vulnerable person got three shots, and we’re not done with the wave yet? How is it that the deaths per capita are now higher than some of the worst countries pre-vaccine with more pathogenic variants?

We are seeing the same dynamic in Finland, Taiwan, Australia, and New Zealand – all countries that were barely affected by the pandemic … until everyone was triple-jabbed. Australia, for example, recorded just 2,239 COVID deaths over the entirety of 2020 and 2021, but has already had 5,555 in 2022 after only four and a half months.

We are observing the same pattern in the U.S., not just for case rates but even for hospitalizations. The four most vaccinated states are Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Vermont. The top 10 vaccinated states, with the exception of New Mexico, are all in the northeast. Incidentally, according to the New York Times COVID tracker, the 12 states with the highest hospitalization rates (including D.C.) are all in the northeast, except for Michigan. All of the lowest-vaccinated states in the south, Great Plains, and Rocky Mountains have the lowest hospitalization rates. The Wall Street Journal has taken notice of this trend too.

One might suggest that this might be a seasonal curve that affects the northeast states. But why would they get a late spring hit? That is usually the beginning of the southern wave.

If you’ve noticed, before the release of the shots, the virus followed an almost regimented epidemiological curve, quickly rising and then falling back to baseline, based on seasonality and geography. That has all been broken since the latter part of 2021 and seems totally out of whack today. Former Trump administration official and epidemiologist Dr. Paul Alexander noted on his Substack the bizarre changes:

We are seeing 4 troubling developments in the waves:

1) the intervals between waves are shorter, so waves are more frequent

2) the peaks are high

3) subsequent peaks are higher than prior peaks shorter

4) the downward slope is not coming back to baseline (where we would have seen herd immunity and the wave would be over); we are seeing plateauing on the downward side higher than earlier baseline and then a new wave

Indeed, this is completely divorced from the behavior of the virus before the vaccine. For example, take a look at the curves for Australia and New Zealand.

Notice how they never reset to baseline like we saw in most countries in the first year of the pandemic. They now endlessly vacillate, which runs counter to the rules of herd immunity. In the past, it was all or nothing – a sharp wave for six weeks, then peace and quiet for at least a few months until the next wave. Now it just seems to meander indefinitely – going back and forth at random times and seasons.

Dr. Alexander hypothesizes that this is due to the shots preventing immunity:

This indicates that there is a high level of transmission and infectiousness remaining in the population after a wave and really suggests that the pandemic is NOT being allowed to peter out and BE OVER. This is due to the sub-optimal immune pressure being placed on the spike by the non-sterilizing vaccine, non-neutralizing antibodies that provoke tremendous selection pressure and the emergence of infectious variants.

You need not absorb this concern exclusively from a former Trump scientist. Take a listen to ABC’s chief medical correspondent, Jennifer Ashton, who postulates that boosters for the original variant could block antibodies for the current variant, manifesting in original antigenic sin, which overloads and shuts down your system’s ability to respond to the proper variant.

Even rabid vaccine promoter Dr. Paul Offit, director of the vaccine education center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, recently wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that boosters are “not risk free.”

And all age groups are at risk for the theoretical problem of an “original antigenic sin” — a decreased ability to respond to a new immunogen because the immune system has locked onto the original immunogen. An example of this phenomenon can be found in a study of nonhuman primates showing that boosting with an omicron-specific variant did not result in higher titers of omicron-specific neutralizing antibodies than did boosting with the ancestral strain. This potential problem could limit our ability to respond to a new variant.

He also mentions the obvious risk of myocarditis. Yet without even seeking the review of its expert panel, the FDA authorized boosters for 5- to 11-year-olds this week!

At this point the question is: Will any new set of facts on safety and efficacy take down these shots? An entire baby formula factory was shut down after four possible deaths, but the shots are still going strong after 28,000 reported deaths to VAERS and 156,000 hospitalizations. In fact, the more it fails the immune system, the more it engenders a need for more boosters, which are approved with enthusiasm. Who says crime doesn’t pay?
aluxum/Getty Images

Horowitz: Mysterious gynecological ailments reported as stillbirths rise in some countries. Coincidence?

"The effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on sperm, a pregnancy, a fetus, or a nursing child are not known." ~Pfizer’s informed consent document

There’s a reason why we don’t offer novel therapeutics, especially those with numerous side effects already confirmed, to pregnant women. To this day, there is no effort on the part of our government to study the consequences of the menstrual irregularities being experienced ubiquitously among women who took the COVID shots. Will the latest study, on a rare condition of uterine lining shedding self-reported by women who took the shot, finally convince the medical establishment to take a step back? Probably not.

Decidual cast shedding (DCS) is a rare gynecological disorder in which a woman secretes her entire uterine lining intact through the vaginal canal as if she were having menstrual bleeding. It is so rare that the authors of this paper could only find 40 documented cases in 109 years. Yet in their survey of 6,049 women from May 16, 2021, through December 31, 2021, right after most young women got the shot, 292, or 4.8%, of the respondents self-reported a case of DCS. The findings were published in the Gazette of Medical Sciences.

Tiffany Parotto, in conjunction with several obstetricians and scientists, conducted the MyCycleStory survey, which contained 91 questions, targeting all women 18 years and older who were experiencing menstrual anomalies. As the data was collected, much to the surprise of the researchers, who were mainly trying to study the scope of menstrual irregularities, “there was an abnormally high number of women who reported that they had experienced ‘Decidual Cast Shedding / release of a layer of uterine lining, a thick sack-like substance’, as presented in the survey.” They note, “Respondents who reported having experienced DCS in the past were excluded from the analysis data set.”

Among the 292 women who reported as having secreted a large, intact piece of tissue all in one piece at some point last year, nearly all of them (96.2%) reported experiencing menstrual irregularities. The median age of those who reported DCS was 35, but 22 of the women were post-menopausal.

Interestingly, they found that the temporal trends of two related Google search terms – “decidual cast” and “decidual cast covid vaccine” – increased 2000% in April 2021 and then again in June from the prior and subsequent months of these peaks. Although not scientific, it certainly is very revealing, given how rare this condition is and how few medical professionals, much less laymen, ever heard of it.

Whether and why the shots might cause these cast sheddings are beyond the scope of the findings, but the authors speculate as to a possible pathophysiology.

“One hypothesis is that the COVID-19 vaccine interrupts the complex balance of ovulation orchestrated by the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis and thus produces anovulatory bleeding disorders. It is known from COVID-19 mRNA vaccine documents that there is concentration of the nanolipid particles and the mRNA cargo in the ovaries. This produces significant inflammatory response in the ovaries and could contribute to menstrual abnormalities, although there are many other potential mechanisms that could be involved.”

The authors also wonder if what some women are reporting is not a classic decidual cast shedding, but rather some form of fibrin-like blood clot. They show pictures that some of the shedding women have shown them, and they do bear some resemblance to the fibrin-like clots some embalmers have reported pulling out of dead bodies beginning last year.

Given what we already know about the shots causing menstrual irregularities and that the pro-inflammatory lipid nanoparticles are deposited in the ovaries, it shouldn’t be our job to prove they definitively cause miscarriages and stillbirths. It should be the job of the manufacturers to disprove they are a problem before continuing with the mass vaccination. And it’s not like we aren’t seeing sudden spikes in stillbirths that are still unexplained.

Remember when Scotland reported levels of stillbirths last September not seen since the late 1980s? Well, the numbers are now creeping up again in the early part of 2022, and authorities don’t have an explanation. In September, Public Health Scotland announced that 21 newborns had died that month, triggering an investigation because the numbers rose above an upper control limit for the first time in four years. The neonatal death rate at the time was reported as 4.9 per 1,000 live births and was revised up to 5.1. That is more than double the five-year average of 2.2 per 1,000 live births.

At the time, the Herald Scotland and the BBC reported that COVID was initially ruled out as a culprit. As for the vaccine, the Herald Scotland reported that they have no plans to ever investigate it. “The vaccination status of the mothers of the infants who died is unknown and will not be released due to ‘patient confidentiality,’” reported the longest-running national newspaper in the world last December.

Now the BBC is reporting that, after receding for a few months, the neonatal death rate is back up to 4.6 per 1,000 births and is currently the subject of a Public Health Scotland investigation. They quote doctors again suggesting that it is unlikely to be COVID (after all, we didn’t see this in 2020), but what is the cause? Just as with the sudden pediatric hepatitis, there seem to be a lot of mystery ailments that began in 2021.

This comes on the heels of new data from Iceland that shows stillbirths and first-year infant deaths nearly doubled in 2021 over the previous year, roughly charting with the Scottish rates.

So, what is this mystery variable? While we can’t prove yet that it’s because of the gene therapy that was introduced to almost every adult, it would be insane not to investigate it. As of early May, there were 4,615 miscarriages reported to VAERS and 10,405 instances of vaginal/uterine hemorrhaging. Remember, miscarriages are extremely hard to pin on the vaccine, so the fact that so many felt they could report it demonstrates there is likely a woeful underreporting rate.

How this shot can be continued without detailed studies concluding the shots, and the accompanying menstrual irregularities, are not damaging the reproductive system is shocking beyond belief. Where is the sense of urgency?
Chin Junxia Xinhua/Getty Images

Horowitz: States must pre-emptively nullify any WHO international pandemic regulations

“And now is a time when things are shifting. We’re going to — there’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it. And we’ve got to unite the rest of the free world in doing it.” ~Joe Biden, March 21, 2022

Any Republican running for any office this year without mentioning his intent to fight the global pandemic treaty or regulations may as well run as a Democrat. In the past, odious global agreements threatened our national sovereignty. This one will quite literally abrogate our individual sovereignty as human beings and make us all lab rats in the hands of wicked global elite oligarchs.

On May 22, the World Health Assembly, the governing body of the World Health Organization, will meet in Geneva, Switzerland, to discuss the next step in its nefarious pandemic treaty and the quest to use “public health” to expand the WHO’s power over sovereign states. Representatives from 193 nations, including the U.S, will be attending. Interestingly, the only country not invited is Taiwan, of course, at the behest of its Chinese puppet masters. What is the nature of this pandemic treaty agenda?

On Jan. 24, 2022, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the WHO, explained the treaty was a “priority” to “urgently strengthen WHO as the leading and directing authority on global health, at the center of the global health architecture.” In chilling words he laid out the guiding principle of this wicked plot. “We all want a world in which science triumphs over misinformation; solidarity triumphs over division; and equity is a reality, not an aspiration,” he added. He concluded, “We are one world, we have one health, we are one WHO.”

Until now, the Biden administration appeared awfully quiet about this treaty, unlike some of the other recent international climate treaties about which officials have been quite vocal. However, it has come to light that several months ago, the Biden administration quietly sent the WHO several amendments to a 2005 international health regulation to be considered at the May 22 meeting about the treaty. At the time, the White House never issued an official statement or held a press conference. The draft was not made public until mid-April.

What is the nature of these amendments? They would essentially allow the director-general of the WHO to declare a public health emergency in a country and unilaterally coerce its citizens to take certain actions. The proposed amendment deletes a critical sentence from Article 9 of the 2005 International Health Regulations: “WHO shall consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring…”

What could be the benign reason for the Biden administration erasing an existing requirement that the WHO first consult with the government of that particular country before making a determination? If there was any doubt about the motivations of these amendments and the direction in which they want to take our sovereignty, look at the next proposed change:

The Biden administration wants all the emergency declarations to be mandatory and cut out all views of the concerned state.

The amendments are also designed to truncate the period of time for approving this travesty. The current WHO regulations provide for an 18-month grace period during which a nation may withdraw its “yes” vote for the amendments. The Biden administration draft proposal would truncate that period to just six months.

There are numerous other additions proposed to the 2005 regulation that strengthen the hand of the director-general, as well as the creation of a new compliance committee that can be used to bully states that don’t cooperate. Under the proposed amendments, the WHO would be tasked with developing an “early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources …” Unknown causes could encompass anything under the sun.

The salient fact here is that rather than publicly supporting a new pandemic treaty, the Biden administration is trying to use the global momentum for such a treaty to strengthen existing regulations the U.S. already signed on to. The administration will never get 67 votes in the Senate to ratify a formal treaty of this nature. So they are seeking an end run around the Treaty Clause of the Constitution by strengthening this existing agreement.

In a memo from the U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Geneva, the Biden administration lists 20 countries plus the 27-member European Union as supporting the amendments. Those 20 countries are: Albania, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, India, Jamaica, Japan, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Peru, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay.

The solution is very simple. Every Republican running for state or local office must pledge to pass a resolution pre-emptively declaring these regulations null and void. Only something ratified by 67 senators has the force of law. Any international hocus-pocus is dead on arrival.

Notice how the Biden administration just held a “global Covid summit,” in which they all unanimously warned about the really bad pandemic this fall that will be worse than what we experienced.

They are clearly grooming the public to accept a Shanghai-style concentration camp created by the global governments. China is gaslighting an even more severe response to what officials seem to know is “coming” next, just as they did in January 2020 in Wuhan. Now is the time to nip the shoots of arbitrary tyrannical powers in the bud before they blossom. Congressional Republicans must commit to blocking all of the WHO’s funding in this upcoming budget bill. State legislatures must be ready to convene and prohibit – and even criminalize – the implementation of any international standard on pandemics. It’s also time for congressional Republicans to create a joint committee along with representatives from each state legislature to investigate which entities were behind the original pandemic. It would certainly shed light on those who seem to have foresight about the next one.

If we are still complacent this time around, after everything we’ve learned and experienced the past two years, we deserve the fate that awaits us.
Ildo Frazao/Getty Images

Horowitz: The FDA is planning a therapeutic jihad on American children in June

Typically, a lack of efficacy and a cataclysmic level of hundreds of different side effects would be reason to take a therapeutic off the market. But in the post-Nuremberg Code era we find ourselves in, such outcomes serve as a resume enhancer for the product. The FDA is planning a blitz of increased approvals of the shots on the youngest of Americans, yet not a single national Republican has stood up and said “No.” Only one governor, Ron DeSantis, has recommended against their use in children. Which will be the first state to block implementation of the FDA’s new therapeutic jihad on behalf of Big Pharma?

The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) has an ambitious schedule for this coming June. Here are its upcoming meetings.

June 7: Approval of Novavax first time for those over 18.

June 8: Approval of Moderna in teenagers.

June 21: Approval of Moderna in kids under 6.

June 22: Approval of Pfizer in kids under 5.

June 28: Exploring new shots for new variants.

Isn’t it interesting how they are meeting about the need for new shots for the current variants after already likely approving old shots on babies who don’t need the shots and for a variant that hasn’t existed for over a year?

Here we have many European countries banning the Moderna shot on those under 30 because of myocarditis, yet our government will likely expand its use to babies at a whopping dose of 25 micrograms! We now have over 1.2 million adverse events reported to VAERS, and CDC researchers admitted in a JAMA paper that the myocarditis numbers – just shy of 40,000 – are “likely” underreported. Also, we now know that Pfizer and the FDA knew about 1,223 deaths shortly after release. As for Moderna, we don’t have a single court-released document from the company yet, so who knows what they are hiding?

It would be one thing to approve something that worked amazingly for COVID despite terrible side effects. But the shot is a complete bust.

The expectation of negative efficacy from these shots has become so widely accepted that now the only question is who is the next famous politician or celebrity to get COVID multiple times after having gotten three or four shots. Take a look at this chart from the Walgreens COVID-19 index of all its testing this past week broken down by vaccination status:

Have you ever seen a vaccine of which the more doses you get, the more likely you are to test positive? Notice how the unvaccinated account for a lesser share of cases than either their share of the population or of Walgreens-administered COVID tests. The results are based on 81,818 tests administered nationwide in Walgreens stores from May 2 through May 8.

So now they want to take vaccines with such counterproductive outcomes and foist them upon children? Remember, the FDA has already demanded the manufacturers produce a study on subclinical myocarditis. In its Pharmacovigilance Plan Review Addendum for Comirnaty, the agency cited one study at the time of Pfizer’s approval noting that subclinical myocarditis might be 60 times as prevalent as clinical myocarditis. That would bring down the 1 in 1,000 rate among young males to as low as 1 in 17 for subclinical ticking time bombs!

Let’s not forget that in all the children’s trials, there were zero deaths and hospitalizations in the placebo groups. So, what exactly were we trying to protect against – even before we knew the shots weren’t effective and possibly negatively effective? Cold or flu-like symptoms? Well, here is the data of side effects from Moderna’s 5-11 trial:

“The most frequently reported adverse reactions were pain at the injection site (92%), fatigue (70%), headache (64.7%), myalgia (61.5%), arthralgia (46.4%), chills (45.4%), nausea/vomiting (23%), axillary swelling/tenderness (19.8%), fever (15.5%), injection site swelling (14.7%) and redness (10%).”

So even before we get to more serious side effects like heart inflammation, we have a massive percentage of children getting flu-like symptoms from the shots, which is what they would get anyway from the virus. How can this pass the threshold of any principle laid out in the Nuremberg Code or the Helsinki Declaration?

It’s gotten so bad that Pfizer and Moderna can no longer rely upon dubious trials showing a 90% reduction in COVID. Especially for young children, even for mild infection, they couldn’t even manipulate any data showing any degree of efficacy, so they had to rely on an arbitrary measure of antibody titers rather than clinical outcomes. In shocking statement before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, Peter Marks, director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, conceded they would approve the shots on young children even if the manufacturer’s own dubious data shows less than 50% efficacy (and even that is only for minor illness).

"If these vaccines seem to be mirroring efficacy in adults and just seem to be less effective against Omicron like they are for adults, we will probably still authorize" because they nonetheless reduce the risk of severe disease in the mildest COVID variant, Marks revealed during the May 9 briefing.

Just keep in mind that, according to the CDC, 74.2% of kids 0-11 already got natural immunity from prior infection. So not only will they fail to test kids for antibodies before injecting them, but even the remaining quarter who might be COVID-naive, they are trading risk of death and severe side effects (and pervasive mild side effects) for a possible tiny degree of very short-term efficacy against sniffles, but a long-term negative efficacy against those sniffles. A preprint study by the NY State Department of Health in February showed that the Pfizer shot was just 12% effective against the first Omicron variant for 5- to 11-year-olds, but drops to -41% after just 42 days!

How can any of these shots be administered until we understand why so many data points seem to show intensifying negative efficacy with time? It’s like investing in a stock that first goes up for a few weeks, but then you erase all the gains within a few days and then gradually lose all your principal investment.

Every Republican claims to be pro-life, but distributing these shots to young children is not pro-life, even if they are not quite mandated. Would they sit idly by if the federal government distributed abortifacients throughout their states?
Natalia Semenova/Getty Images

Horowitz: Five new data points indicate cataclysmic level of vaccine injury

Just how many people were injured by the shots? We don’t know, and our government has no desire to find out. But a torrent of new data demonstrates that it’s exponentially more than any adverse event reporting system is showing, and the number of severe reactions could be millions in each large country.

According to Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk (MDR), a public broadcaster in Leipzig, "The number of severe complications after vaccination against Sars-CoV-2 is 40 times higher than previously recorded by the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI)," a study with around 40,000 participants by the Berlin Charité concludes. “One result: eight out of 1,000 vaccinated people struggle with serious side effects.”

This is a very strict criteria and only includes symptoms that last for weeks or months and require medical attention. Yet the researchers believe that adverse events were underreported by a factor of 40 and that nearly 1% of people experienced this degree of injury from the shots. Roughly 179 million doses are administered in Germany.

These numbers come several months after a whistleblower for BKK, one of Germany’s largest health insurers, provided data based on medical billing codes to show that the official German adverse event count from the Paul Ehrlich Institute underreported adverse events by a factor of 7 and the number of severe adverse events by a factor of 13.86.

These numbers also harmonize with the survey from Israel’s health ministry, which showed 0.3% of all Israelis who got Pfizer boosters reported being hospitalized within 30 days and 0.5% reported Bell’s palsy, in addition to 4.5% reporting some degree of neurological side effects. If the numbers were this high just for the boosters, in totality (including all doses) the numbers were probably higher, which would corroborate the number of 0.8% experiencing severe reactions reported by the new Berlin Charité study.

If you extrapolate a rate of eight severe reactions per thousand vaccinated people, that would add up to over 2 million people in the United States severely injured. And again, these are just the injuries that are somewhat apparent in the short term.

Put another way, if we apply the underreporting factor of “severe adverse events” in Germany to VAERS in the United States, where 99,537 people have reported checking into an urgent care following the vaccine, that number could be as high as close to 4 million. As of now, there are 61,106 reported vaccine-related hospitalizations in the U.S. since the start of the vaccination campaign. Using an extrapolation of an underreporting factor (URF) of 40 for VAERS data – aligning it with the estimated URF of Germany’s reporting system – that would peg the total number of vaccine-related hospitalizations at just under 2.5 million.

Now, it could be that VAERS captures a larger share of the injures than the Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany, but it is interesting to note that a study conducted by Steve Kirsch and Dr. Jessica Rose last year estimated an underreporting factor of 41 with VAERS, which would be right in line with the German estimate. Either way, if the number of severely injured is anywhere close to what several disparate data points are indicating from around the world, this is a public policy calamity of epic proportions.

Where is the urgent effort on the part of our government to track and monitor vaccine injury from the product the government forced upon the people? According to a recent FOIA document obtained by Vice, the CDC paid a controversial data broker $420,000 last year for access to a year of Americans’ “anonymized” cell phone location data. They tracked how often people visited vaccination sites, as well as lockdown compliance, such as how often they visited “parks, gyms, or weight management businesses.”

Imagine if they used such technology to track and surveil vaccine injury or to track how often people are visiting websites for information about treatment of heart ailments or vertigo.

The data points we already have are too blatant to ignore. The only question is whether it’s even worse than we think. Here are four more recent discoveries to consider:

1) A study out of Cyprus published in Cureus titled, “Mortality in Cyprus Over the Period 2016-2021” observed a 9.7% increase in all-cause mortality in Cyprus in 2021 compared to 2020, and 16.5% compared to the mean mortality of the previous five years. The pattern developed mainly in the third and fourth quarters of last year, perfectly aligning with the timing of the vaccine surge in the Mediterranean island.

This is a pattern developing with all-cause mortality and cardiac injury/mortality studies around the world – that we are seeing many more deaths in 2021 than 2020 and correlating more with the take-up of the vaccine by time and age group, not with the prevalence and severity of COVID cases.

The study concludes that most of the substantial increase in mortality in Cyprus in 2021 is not explained by COVID-19 deaths and is “parallel to the concurrent vaccination campaign.” This should be “comprehensively investigated by the National and European public health authorities to identify and address the underlying causes,” add the authors from Cyprus and Denmark.

Most people in Cyprus were not vaccinated until the second half of 2021. And indeed the study seems to show that the entirety of the excess deaths in 2020 and the first two quarters of 2021 over the previous four years are fully explained by the sum of the recorded COVID deaths. That is not the case in the latter two quarters of 2021, when more than half of the excess deaths were not explained by the total COVID deaths. Moreover, “The number of all-cause deaths in the third quarter of 2021 was more than eight standard deviations further from the mean of deaths in the third quarters of the years 2016-2020.”

2) MIT and Israeli researchers studied the trend of cardiac-related ambulance calls in Israel in 2019 (pre-COVID) and compared them to the same time frame in 2020 (COVID but pre-vaccine) and 2021 (COVID with vaccine). The study found that COVID shots were "significantly associated" with a 25% increase in emergency medical services for both cardiac arrest (CA) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in 16- to 39-year-olds in Israel from January to May 2021. Both the fact that they were able to use 2020 as a control and the fact that the January increase "seems to track closely the administration of 2nd dose vaccines" makes a credible case that COVID cannot be the culprit behind most of the increase. The data is also very reliable because Israel has only one ambulance service in the entire country, which provided the researchers with uniform data. Countries like Australia are also reporting sudden heart attacks and a crisis for EMS availability and waiting times, with “historic” demand for emergency services.

3) There has been a 28% increase in deaths in Iceland for the first quarter of this year over the previous five-year average. Only about a third of those excess deaths can be attributed to COVID, and the timing coincides with a sharp increase in boosters. Also, as we are witnessing in numerous other countries that barely had any COVID deaths until everyone was triple-vaxxed, we shouldn’t be seeing this amount of COVID death either if the shots really worked. Likewise, Australia experienced a 22% increase in deaths in January of this year, well beyond anything during the pre-vaccination part of the pandemic.

4) A recent preprint Danish study in the prestigious Lancet, which followed the all-cause mortality of the Pfizer and Moderna trial participants, found absolutely no all-cause mortality benefit from the two mRNA shots. In addition, researchers discovered an increase in heart-related deaths among those who took the shots over the placebo. One of the authors noted that “there is an overweight of cardiovascular deaths in the Pfizer group,” which is “a potential danger signal that warrants further scrutinisation.”

“I think there are danger signals in relation to cardiovascular deaths and diseases. We know that now with certainty for the mRNA vaccines with respect to myocarditis and pericarditis,” said Professor Christine Stabell-Benn from the University of Southern Denmark in an interview with Unherd. “But also anecdotally, I would say there are reports of cardiovascular deaths which I think deserve further scrutinisation. This is just a piece in the puzzle, but it adds to the evidence that suggests this is something which should be investigated further for the mRNA vaccines.”

This last point is critical. It’s not any one data point that stands out, but the preponderance of evidence across time and across the world that seems to paint a very clear picture of safety concerns. Pfizer has already earned more than five times the amount raked in by ExxonMobile for the first quarter of this year – all built upon global governments endorsing, marketing, distributing, and mandating this untested product. If the current information is not enough to pause these shots, then I shudder to think of what comes next.
Artur Widak/Getty Images

Horowitz: Why there is an urgent need to study effects of COVID shots on reproductive health

When a private actor seeks to get a product approved for human use, the company must prove conclusively using the scientific method that the product is safe. How much more that principle applies when governments endorse, market, and mandate the use of the product. Yet here we are, 16 months into the release of this product, with endless safety signals showing a diverse array of injuries from the shot, but we are the ones being forced to conclusively prove that it causes each one of these maladies to the Nth degree. Meanwhile, the shots are still mandated in the military, for health care workers, and for many others.

Nowhere is the principle of “unsafe until proven safe” applied more rigorously in the world of pharmaceuticals than products marketed to pregnant women and young children. Yet the shots and other COVID therapeutics were approved for pregnant women and children without running proper short-term, much less long-term, safety studies, regardless of the health status or risk factors of those people, including those who already had COVID.

In the FDA’s “Summary Basis for Regulatory Action on Comirnaty” – published nearly a year after the shot had already been administered and, in some cases, mandated upon pregnant women – the drug regulator stated plainly that proper information for use for pregnant and nursing women is missing. "Missing information: Use in pregnancy and lactation; Vaccine effectiveness; Use in pediatric individuals <12 years of age," the FDA divulged.

Incidentally, this disclosure is right next to the admission that Pfizer knew about both the risks of heart inflammation and vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease, the latter of which might be the culprit for recent trends of negative efficacy, with the vaccinated appearing to get sicker from the virus.

It should also be noted that in Comirnaty’s (Pfizer BNT162b2) purple cap package insert, the label states unambiguously that “available data on Comirnaty administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy.”

Then, of course, there is Pfizer’s informed consent document (p. 10), which states, "The effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on sperm, a pregnancy, a fetus, or a nursing child are not known."

That right there demonstrates that the pressuring and even mandating of the shot on pregnant women violates the Nuremberg Code, and anyone who claims that the vaccine has been affirmatively proven safe in pregnant women is publishing false information.

It is in that vein that I present the latest report on stillbirths and infant deaths in Iceland by local daily paper daily Frettin, based on new data from Statistics Iceland. Given that Iceland is a small nation of just 366,000, it is easy to pick up on sudden shifts in health outcomes, which makes the fact that there has been a precipitous rise in stillbirths in 2021 all the more alarming. In 2021, there were 17 stillbirths and 35 first-year infant deaths reported in Iceland, up from just 9 and 19 respectively in 2020. In other words, stillbirths and first-year infant deaths nearly doubled.

According to Frettin, when you factor in the number of births every year, the average stillbirth per 1,000 live children for the last nine years (2011-2020) is 2 per 1,000. The increase for 2021 over the previous nine-year average was 75%. The increase in perinatal mortality (includes both stillbirths and children who die within the first week) is 82% in 2021 compared to the average of the previous nine years before that. The number of deaths in infants for the entire first year increased by 100% compared to the average of the previous nine years.

We don’t know the cause of the increase, but we do know there was no increase in 2020 when we only had COVID has a novel public health crisis but did not yet have the shots on the market. We don’t know if the shots had anything to do with this increase, but we do know the shots have caused a ubiquitous disruption in menstrual cycles, we do know that the lipid nanoparticles are deposited liberally in the ovaries, and we do know that the lipid nanoparticles are hyper-inflammatory. Again, why should we have to wait years to study these safety concerns to take the shots off the market until they are proven unsafe, rather than removing them from the market until they are proven safe?

There are other concerning data points from two hospitals in Israel revealed by Josh Guetzkow via an Israeli FOIA request. In May 2021, Rambam hospital in Haifa, Israel, had 42 SBMAs (stillbirth, miscarriage and abortion), which was nearly double the average of the May total from the previous two years and 30% higher than the highest number of any month in the previous two years. Moreover, the rate among vaccinated women in that hospital was 34% higher than among the unvaccinated. Also, Sheba Medical Center, Israel’s largest hospital, experienced the highest SBMA count in June, right around the time of the vaccine take-up for pregnant women. There were 146 SBMAs that month, 30% higher than the average of the previous two years and 11% higher than the largest number of SBMAs for any month in the previous two years, which was 132 in March 2019.

To this day, not a single government has attempted to follow up on these safety signals and determine what is indeed causing these increases. We already know from Pfizer’s released documents that the company knew of thousands of maladies and injuries reported after the first few months of its vaccine campaign. Moreover, a confidential Pfizer document (p. 29) recently revealed that the company has not and will not conduct genotoxicity and carcinogenicity tests, which are standard for vaccine products.

Thus, they have no desire to find out whether the shots can cause mutations in DNA or cancers. Remember, one study from Sweden has already found “the spike protein localizes in the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair by impeding key DNA repair protein BRCA1 and 53BP1 recruitment to the damage site.” That doesn’t exactly sound like a product I’d want to give to those who want to have children until we have better studies.According to the Declaration of Helsinki on medical ethics, “Physicians may not be involved in a research study involving human subjects unless they are confident that the risks have been adequately assessed and can be satisfactorily managed.” This is not just any research study but one involving 2 billion human beings, with hundreds of thousands of pregnant women being used as lab rats before adequately assessing risks and after some risks are already apparent. It’s a new bio-medical paradigm of “mandate first, study never.”

Horowitz: Black lives don’t matter to BLM, as thousands more killed by homicide since 2020

It had even more corporate and cultural support than the vaccines and Ukraine. It was the greatest juggernaut in politics that even ensnared many Republican politicians. Yet never have we seen a movement that accomplished the opposite of what it was purported to do in such a short time frame. It turns out that as a result of the BLM-induced crime wave, reversing a generation-long trend of reduced crime, there were thousands of excess black homicide victims, a body count that is still climbing.

Hannah Meyers, director of the policing and public safety initiative at the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News’ Emma Colton that there were nearly 2,500 excess black murders in 2020 over the previous year and the 10-year average. Here is a breakdown of the data from Fox:

In 2019, at least 7,484 Black Americans were murdered. That number shot up to at least 9,941 murdersin 2020, meaning there was an increase of 2,457 Black Americans murdered over the previous year.

The number of Black murders was also far higher than White murders in 2020. The FBI data shows there 7,043 White people murdered that year, meaning 2,898 more Black people were killed compared to Whites.

Between 2010 and 2019, there was an average of 5,954 White murders, which is roughly 16% lower than the 10-year average of Black murders. During that same time period, an average of 6,927 Black Americans were murdered each year, meaning Black murders shot up by 43% in 2020 compared to the previous 10-year average.

What is evident from this analysis is that there were two periods of abnormal increases in black homicides: one in 2015 after Ferguson and Freddie Gray and then a much sharper increase in 2019 with George Floyd. In other words, every time they promote the anti-police and anti-incarceration message, it backfires, and black people are harmed the most.

Preliminary numbers from 2021 show an even greater increase in homicides. And given that major cities like Baltimore and Philadelphia set new records, it’s very likely that black victims accounted for an even greater share of the excess.

Republicans stupidly squandered the Trump years trying to outflank the Democrats on de-incarceration in an effort to pander to the black vote. They wrongly focused on the fact that blacks are disproportionately incarcerated, even though that is an unfortunate reflection of the crime rate. What they should have focused on is that black victims of crime are disproportionately affected by jailbreak policies. Despite composing just 13% of the population, they account for the majority of the homicide victims. Releasing career criminals ensures that the body count goes up.

Just how badly did the establishment Republicans misread the politics of crime? In a recent Pew Research poll, when asked an open-ended question about the most important issue to their community, the black respondents chose crime and violence as the No. 1 issue, even ahead of the economy. Just 3% chose racism! This trend persisted across most groups, with every age group over 30 choosing violence over the economy as the top issue of concern. “Violence or crime is the most mentioned issue among both those who say being Black is extremely or very important to how they think about themselves (18%) and those who say being Black is not as important to how they think about themselves (13%),” concluded Pew.

Not surprisingly, income and education status played a role:

Black adults with a college degree or higher are less likely (14%) than those with lower educational attainment (18%) to say violence or crime is the most important issue in their community. Meanwhile, the top community issue mentioned among Black adults with lower or middle incomes is violence or crime (20% among lower income, 16% among middle income).

Thus, elitist Republicans and Democrats who are only around high-income college-educated white people couldn’t care less about crime because many of them live in gated neighborhoods. So they can afford to virtue-signal over incarcerating black criminals while ignoring the plight of the victims of crime.

In reality, if policymakers really wanted to help black communities, they’d deal with the most important factor leading to both the disproportionate rate of criminal behavior and victimhood among black people: gang violence. According to the FBI, “Criminal gangs commit as much as 80 percent of crimes in many communities.” A decade ago, it was estimated that 1.4 million gang members from over 33,000 gangs “are responsible for an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others.” Again, given that most victims of violent crime are African-American and most gang recruiting is in their neighborhoods, the gangs are the biggest security threat to black neighborhoods.

Most of these individuals are career violent criminals who are often picked up on gun crimes. Yet the same politicians who claim to detest guns will give these criminals a slap on the wrist. It is by that pool of criminals that the blood of African-Americans is spilled in big cities every day.

A group of Yale doctors recently published an article in the British Medical Journal titled, “Racism as a leading cause of death in the United States.” “The excess deaths associated with race can be understood as a toll that is in large part a result of racism in the United States,” lectured the pediatricians in what should be a medical journal. “There is no biological reason, independent of social context, that Black people should die younger than White people.”

Indeed, they are correct. It is the obsessive racism that focuses on color of skin rather than justice, deterring crime, and punishing career criminals that is most responsible for homicide being the leading cause of death for black people under 35, according to the CDC. The homicide rate for black males 18-34 was 17.7 times higher than the rate for white males the same age. How come nobody cares about that disparity? Well, therein lies the ultimate racism.
ThamKC/Getty Images

Horowitz: Biden’s plan to alleviate fuel crisis? Dilute the fuel supply even more with corn needed for food

One could not have conjured up a more odious and counterproductive policy than taking 40% of our corn supply and using it to dilute our fuel, thereby increasing the cost of both food and gas. Yet not only has the Biden administration declined to repeal the ethanol mandate during this unprecedented period of inflation and supply shocks, he will increase ethanol use in a way that will further deplete gas mileage for many motorists and place a greater demand on corn, which is the antecedent to the entire chain of food costs, with prices approaching record highs,

Ever since the pathetic mandate was implemented in 2005 and expanded in 2007, oil refiners couldn’t meet the arbitrary sum of billions of gallons of biofuels to blend into the nation’s fuel supply, even if they wanted to. For 2022, the mandate stands at 36 billion gallons. It’s not safe for engines to have a fuel blend of more than 10% ethanol, but for years the corn lobby was suggesting, in a quite self-fulfilling way, that the way to meet the mandate is by allowing more flexibility to blend “E15” all year round with no restrictions from the Clean Air Act. The real solution, though, is to abolish the original mandate.

Ideally, we should offer “E0.” We should repeal the mandate, which will save independent refiners, alleviate the artificial demand on corn prices and land use, and enjoy more miles per gallon of unadulterated fuel. Instead, the Biden administration has chosen to allow gasoline that uses a 15% ethanol blend, which is typically banned during the summer, to be sold throughout this year. Liberal Republicans like Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley always pointed to the right to choose and be free to sell E15, but he and the corn lobby forget that we should be free to choose zero ethanol, and oil refiners shouldn’t be forced to blend it into the mix. If Grassley and his lobbyists want ethanol, they are welcome to blend E99 with their own refineries and sell it to people who want it without government intervention.

At a time when we should be allowing people to purchase fuel that achieves more miles per gallon, we are inevitably creating greater demand on gas and food at the same time! According to the Department of Energy, “Vehicles will typically go 3% to 4% fewer miles per gallon on E10 and 4% to 5% fewer on E15 than on 100% gasoline.” So that will wipe out any gain in price from using ethanol, which, for once, is slightly cheaper than gasoline, but only because of the war on fossil fuels. Also, because of the corrosive nature of ethanol, a higher blend will inevitably force gas stations to retrofit their pumps with new fuel dispensers and new underground storage tanks. Guess who will pay for that? What about when all the car owners who are tricked into using E15 blow through their warranties and public clamor forces us to bail them out?

And speaking of car owners, as our government makes oil refiners blend more ethanol, another equally absurd and harmful mandate runs head-first into the ethanol mandate: namely, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. In order to serve the gods of the climate and limit the use of fossil fuels, Congress dramatically expanded the CAFE standards in 2007, forcing auto manufacturers to make expensive cars with paper-thin steel in order to comply with the green energy agenda and increase their miles per gallon (mpg) from 27.5 to 35. This was part of Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the same bill that expanded the ethanol mandate, which would later run into problems with the CAFE standards. Just as with the ethanol mandate, the EPA has created a trading credit system in which manufacturers can buy credits from competitors in exchange for not complying with the standard. According to the Heritage Foundation, “a 1 mpg tightening of the standard would cost consumers $7.81 billion annually.”

Fast-forward to last month, and the Biden administration announced its intent to increase the standard to 49 mpg by 2026, essentially barring non-electric cars. So not only will this make cars too expensive for the non-latte-sipping crowd, but it will run into the renewable fuels standard, because there won’t be enough demand for fuel to even meet that standard.

Meanwhile, independent refiners continue to get hammered, as the EPA just denied all of the 36 petitions from small refiners to exempt them from the biofuels standard for the 2018 compliance year. This is done by design to ensure that we don’t create more oil refineries. One could not possibly have conjured up a worse confluence of policies to increase the cost of food, fuel, and cars and destroy jobs in the energy sector. Yet that is likely a feature, not a bug, of their plan. Fewer cars and more expensive food and fuel grease the skids for more dependence on government and less freedom.

Another peculiar thing about the E15 decision is that the reason why the EPA typically bans its sale in the summer under the Clean Air Act is over concern that the higher blend creates more smog. Isn’t it interesting how environmental regulations can be waived to please the corn engine gods, but no such waivers are issued for oil, gas, and coal permitting, the Keystone pipeline, interstate pipelines, transporting liquid natural gas by rail, or drilling in the Gulf of Mexico? In fact, just as the energy crisis was reaching its climax, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), without the approval of Congress, issued a rule that will require all publicly traded companies to disclose the effects of their operations on “climate change.” This rule will make Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley look easy and is designed to cripple the fossil fuels business.

Therefore, don’t be fooled by the recent band-aids placed on our energy ailment created by the Biden administration, such as the move to release more oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. These are temporary political maneuvers to give the impression they are concerned about the consumer while they tighten the noose on fossil fuels, diminish our freedoms, and pay off their well-connected cronies. You might not be able to afford corn for your chickens, but you will have lots of it in the engines of your $50,000 compact cars.

Horowitz: The Brooklyn shooting and the rise of black nationalism

You can’t blame the FBI for seemingly missing every mass shooter or domestic terrorist. After all, the bureau is stretched thin hatching kidnapping plots in Michigan, investigating garage door ropes, and finding anyone who was within a half a mile of the Capitol on January 6. But what about those who are obsessed with white supremacism? Aren’t they the least bit concerned that most of the recent mass casualty shootings and domestic terror attacks appear to be committed by black nationalists?

I couldn’t understand why the Tuesday morning shooting that left 29 shot or otherwise injured in a Brooklyn subway car was not a bigger news story. After all, millions take the NYC subways, and if there is a mass shooting with smoke bombs released, that is a pretty scary event. But by the end of the day, the memory hole became obvious, as has been the case with nearly every dramatic domestic terror attack in recent memory. The suspect in this case was an avowed black nationalist who preached violent hate toward whites. In other words, 99.5% of Americans will never know his name.

Yesterday, police arrested 62-year-old Frank James in connection with the April 12 attack that thankfully led to no fatalities because of a jam in one of his pistol magazines. So, who is Frank James? Andy Ngo, editor of the Post Millennial, found numerous posts from what appears to be his Facebook page promoting BLM, the Black Liberation Army, Nation of Islam, and individuals who attacked whites. He posted a photo of a man who killed five Dallas police officers in 2016 and called on people to kill whites. Just before the April 12 shooting, he posted a video of himself shouting racist statements on a New York street.

"F\u2014 you & your white ass too, you white racist mother f\u2014ker"\n"Slant-eyed f\u2014king piece of sh\u2014"\n"You're a crime against f\u2014king nature, you Spanish speaking mother f\u2014ker"\n\nThe person of interest in the #Brooklyn mass shooting posted a video of himself shouting racial insults in NYC.pic.twitter.com/ajBkMJJnbb
— Andy Ng\u00f4 \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08 (@Andy Ng\u00f4 \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08) 1649850340

James also recently posted a video on YouTube criticizing Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for marrying a white person.

Frank James, the person of interest in the #Brooklyn subway mass shooting, has many videos on YouTube discussing his militant black nationalist views. He recently expressed disappointment that Justice Ketanji Jackson is married to a white man. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtl9pjnppooRbj_YssCKxsA\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/hL0ysMw5VM
— Andy Ng\u00f4 \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08 (@Andy Ng\u00f4 \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08) 1649812425

NYC subway shooter in a drunk rant he posted on YouTube almost a month ago talking about how white people and black people should have no contact with each other and that white people are angry that black people are no longer slavespic.twitter.com/JmUOQS5JBk
— Nuance Bro (@Nuance Bro) 1649813447

Social media is full of these postings from countless individuals, yet they are never censored the way posts on vaccines are. The left claims without any proof that simple conservative speech is proof of white supremacism and leads to violence, yet when we have numerous attacks from black supremacists who are promoting their hate online, that never raises red flags.

In other words, if James turns out to be the shooter, the Brooklyn shooting will go the way of the Waukesha massacre and the attempted assassination of a Louisville mayoral candidate, where all the suspects had a long history of promoting black supremacism. Which is why it’s important to rehash some stories you may never have heard in recent years:

  • In what can only be described as a biblical-level tragedy, six Americans were killed and dozens others were injured when Darrell Edwards Brooks allegedly plowed through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, just two days after the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse in neighboring Kenosha. Brooks has a paper trail of similar grievances as Frank James. Yet few Americans even know this attack occurred, much less understand the motivation behind it.
  • In February, BLM activist Quintez Brown was charged with attempted murder for stepping into the campaign headquarters of Louisville mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg and opening fire. Luckily, the bullets only grazed the candidate’s clothing and the shooter was stopped and apprehended. He came with extended magazines and clearly was coming as an assassin, but a judge let him out on $100,000 bail, which was posted by national BLM umbrella groups. Brown’s Twitter bio reads, “We have one scientific and correct solution, Pan-Africanism: the total liberation and unification of Africa under scientific socialism." And the fact that he attempted to murder a Jewish mayoral candidate should raise some eyebrows, but that is not news.
  • Then there is the Capitol Hill attacker. Yes, the only attack on the Capitol that actually directly killed a Capitol police officer, you know, the one you never heard of. On April 2, 2021, Noah Green, a self-declared follower of Louis Farrakhan, rammed two police cars, resulting in the death of Officer William Evans and the maiming of another officer, before he was shot by police when he exited the car with a knife. I don’t know of any memorials for Officer Evans being used to inveigh against black supremacism or law enforcement programs dedicated to monitoring future Noah Greens.
  • In 2020, David Anderson and Francine Graham, two members of the black nationalist Black Hebrew Israelite church, killed a police officer in Newark after holding hostages at a kosher grocery store and concocted an initial plot to bomb a Jewish community center with enough explosive material to kill people five football fields away.
  • A few months earlier, Grafton Thomas was charged with murder close by in Monsey, New York, when he allegedly charged into a Hanukah party with a machete, killing one and injuring several others. Police later charged him with additional hate crimes after discovering Black Hebrew Israelite writing with swastikas in his possession. In general, Jews are the victims of 58% of the religiously targeted hate crimes. But few focus on who the perpetrators are. These attacks on Jews in the NY/NJ region are continuing. Last week, Dion Marsh, 27, allegedly told his family Jews are “the real devil” and warned of a “blood bath” before running down two people and then stabbing a Jewish man in the chest in Ocean County, NJ.
  • Then there is the rise of black militias, which lends credence to the concern that the supremacist mindset has already gone kinetic. Last June, 29-year-old Othal Wallace was arrested for the execution-style murder of Daytona Beach Officer Jason Rayner. Police believe he was associated with the NFAC Black Militia, the New Black Panther Party, and the Huey P. Newton Gun Club Alabama Chapter. He was apprehended in DeKalb County, Georgia, and found heavily armed in a treehouse at a property allegedly associated with the "Not F***ing Around Coalition" (NFAC). In an interview with NFAC's leader, John Fitzgerald Johnson, also known as Grandmaster Jay, who is currently in jail after being charged with pointing a rifle at Secret Service and Louisville metro police, the Atlantic described many of NFAC's adherents as follows: "They joined a group that promised to take a bite out of the Earth and reserve it for Black people. They expected to be led by a commander who preaches radical separatism, and who will swagger with an AR-15 in public and boast that his snipers can bisect a white militiaman's head from 1,000 yards away. Jay told me that he already had to vet his recruits carefully."

All of these stories jolt your gut with the instinctive thought, “Imagine if a white person, much less a bona fide white supremacist, had done these things.” We would have had civilization, policy, and legal changes to our entire country based on those events.

Unlike the other side, we have no desire to accentuate the race of various perpetrators. If we actually deterred and locked up career violent criminals of all persuasions and had the FBI focused on known threats that aren’t political persecutions, we’d stop most of these attacks. Indeed, Frank James had nine prior arrests and was on the FBI’s radar, but the bureau failed to act. But there is something disquieting about years’ worth of incessant blood libels lodged against white people, in which every cultural and governmental institution inundates people with the idea that black people are oppressed. If we are to believe that merely being white is a threat to black people, then perhaps that is fueling the rise of black nationalism … and with deadly consequences.

It’s never a good idea to begin criminalizing speech, even hateful speech. But we typically count on culture to broadly shun those who engage in that behavior. As it relates to white supremacy, we all know that any individual caught espousing those views will have the weight of the universe marshaled against him. No such deterrent, however, exists against black supremacism, and in fact, it is clearly encouraged by government and culture, which allows not just the vague supremacist sentiments, but even the overt calls for targeted violence against white people to exist unrestricted in the public square, which often can cross the legal boundary into criminal behavior.

Indeed, critical race theory is not just a theory. It has real human consequences.

Horowitz: NH Senate passes bill that could empower hospitals to arrest family members who argue with doctors

One of the most appalling humanitarian emergencies in the country today is the state of care in American hospitals. We have witnessed a shocking disregard for patient care, ignoring of science and basic medical norms, forcible use of toxic drugs like remdesivir, denying family members visitation, and discriminating against people based on medical choices, including denying organs to those who don’t get the shots. Yet rather than redressing the inhumane treatment in the hospitals with a new patient bill of rights, a New Hampshire bill now seeks to criminalize those who dissent and debate doctors when they believe the hospital is mistreating their loved one.

File this under Republicans who don’t know what time it is. On March 31, the New Hampshire Senate passed SB 459, a bill that lowers the threshold needed to arrest someone at a health care facility without a warrant. Dubbed the “Workplace Violence Prevention Program,” this bill defines workplace violence as “any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening behavior that occurs at a health facility, including verbal abuse, without regard to whether the victim sustains an injury, psychological trauma, or stress.”

What happens to such a person? Section 4 allows arrests without warrant if there is probable cause to believe that the person, among other things, will cause problems or “through actual or threatened violence, interfere in the provision of medically necessary health care services.”

In any other era, I wouldn’t think twice about this bill. After all, none of us believe in violence and certainly not directed toward doctors. But where is this bill coming from, and where is it headed, and in what context? I have been inundated with people in distress after doctors refused to talk to them, threw people on ventilators against scientific rationale, blocked medical records, forcibly confiscated prescriptions and vitamins, and often engaged in medical kidnapping by refusing to release the patient upon his request. In other cases, they have called child protective services if they feel the parent is not going along with their novel treatment ideas for a minor patient.

One such case was from a Michigan woman whose daughter was being denied a kidney transplant for not getting the shot. She joined me on my podcast and divulged that a doctor at Spectrum Health/Helen Devos Children’s Hospital in Grand Rapids filed a form 3200 medical neglect report with Michigan Child Protective Services.

What this all means is that family members are now under a tremendous amount of stress, often dealing with hospitals that will take someone who is nominally sick and then tell them they are on their deathbed a day later. Obviously, patient families will be distraught and have a lot of questions for the doctors. Nobody condones violence, but clearly most of these people have not threatened to engage in violence. Under this bill, medical personnel could easily say they feel “harassed,” “intimidated,” or are a recipient of “verbal abuse.” They can certainly say the spouse is “interfere[ing] in the provision of medically necessary health care services.”

Why would they pass such a bill now if they have nothing to hide and there is no systemic problem with treatment, protocols, and transparency in hospitals today? Just last week, a hospital in Pennsylvania threatened to call security on my cousin for advocating on behalf of his mother, who was being mistreated. No sane person would have perceived a threat of physical violence from him when he was challenging them and asking for medical records.

The medical media is decrying a trend of violence against medical personnel. Republican-controlled legislatures in Wisconsin and Utah even passed bills making violence against medical officials a felony, although those bills didn’t lower the threshold for arrest like the New Hampshire bill does. Let’s just concede for argument’s sake that they are telling the truth and, along with more acrimonious conversations with doctors and nurses, there have been instances of violence. Why isn’t anyone wondering why there is such an increase recently?

This trend runs parallel with the evidence that there is more violence against flight attendants over the past two years. While anyone who actually engages in violence should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, isn’t it obvious that this is one of the many consequences of treating people inhumanely both in hospitals and on airplanes? So rather than further clamp down on people, why don’t we address the root cause of the desperate behavior from people being mistreated?

At a time when we need to strengthen patients’ rights and investigate the behavior of these hospitals, Republican legislators are ignoring the cries of thousands and kowtowing to the hospital lobby juggernaut, possibly the most influential special interest in every state legislature.

The trend of weaponizing health care and medical workers to criminalize dissent, human rights, bodily autumn, and the right to choose in treatment should disturb everyone. The fact that they want to silence this debate by calling the police is most revealing of all.