Redfield commends Trump and RFK Jr's 'noble effort to heal our children'



Dr. Robert Redfield, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has in recent years demonstrated his relative immunity to group-think, particularly the strain that infected the medical establishment during the pandemic.

For rejecting the zoonotic origins narrative curated by Anthony Fauci and accepted by prominent personalities in the American medical community, the conservative Christian virologist and HIV researcher received death threats. These, however, did not secure his silence, and Redfield's theories about the virus, its lab origin, and the outbreak timeline have since been recognized widely as the best explanations.

The esteemed virologist appears to have found another narrative to quash, arguing that contrary to claims made by so-called health experts, President Donald Trump stands a good chance of making America healthy again with the help of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

"President Trump has pledged, if elected, to establish a panel of top experts working with Kennedy to investigate what is causing the decades-long increase in chronic health problems and childhood diseases," Redfield noted in a Tuesday op-ed. "He specifically mentioned autoimmune disorders, autism, obesity, and infertility. In 2019, when we took steps to take on the chronic disease epidemic, we also focused on creating earlier interventions in diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, kidney disease, and more."

Over 40% of school-aged children and adolescents have at least one chronic health condition.

Highlighting Kennedy's commitment to begin lifting the chronic disease burden dramatically inside two years, Redfield wrote, "I believe him. And I think President Trump will empower him. I support their noble effort to heal our children."

Redfield stressed that America has "become a sick nation," noting that:

  • chronic disease accounts for over 75% of the country's $4.5 trillion in annual heath care expenditure;
  • over 40% of school-aged children and adolescents have at least one chronic health condition; and
  • childhood obesity has skyrocketed from the mid-1960s from around 4% to 20% this year.

Redfield indicated that highly processed foods are largely to blame for childhood obesity, which 15 million youths aged 2-19 years suffer from.

A massive peer-reviewed study published in the BMJ, the British Medical Association's esteemed journal, found evidence earlier this year indicating "direct associations between greater exposure to ultra-processed foods and higher risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease related mortality, common mental disorder outcomes, overweight and obesity, and type 2 diabetes."

Ultra-processed foods exposure was consistently associated with 32 adverse health outcomes, including all-cause mortality; cancer-related deaths; cardiovascular disease-related deaths; heart disease-related deaths; breast cancer; central nervous system tumors; chronic lymphocytic leukemia; colorectal cancer; pancreatic cancer; prostate cancer; adverse sleep-related outcomes; anxiety; common mental disorder outcomes; depression; asthma; wheezing; Crohn's disease; ulcerative colitis; obesity; hypertension; and type 2 diabetes.

'Private industry uses its political influence to control decision-making at regulatory agencies.'

Redfield noted that highly processed foods are part of a much bigger problem that also includes pesticides, which he indicated are "proven risk factors for neurodevelopmental outcomes in kids, causing maladies like ADHD."

The Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology published a study from the Environmental Working Group earlier this year revealing that among the pesticides the vast majority of Americans have been exposed to is chlormequat, a toxic agricultural chemical linked in animal studies to disrupted fetal growth, damage to the reproductive system, delayed puberty, and reduced fertility.

The EWG researchers said food samples purchased from 2022 and 2023 "show detectable levels of chlormequat in all but two of 25 conventional oat-based products." Quaker Oats and Cheerios were allegedly among the affected cereals.

Redfield underscored that a major problem that Kennedy would have to tackle in concert with a future Trump administration is the "increased special interest and corporate influences on our federal agencies."

"Across a century-plus of cozy courtship, the federal regulators have nearly married the regulated, especially in health care. Today, private industry uses its political influence to control decision-making at regulatory agencies, law enforcement entities, and legislatures," said the virologist.

Redfield said Kennedy was right in accusing the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and the CDC of agency capture:

All three of the principal health agencies suffer from agency capture. A large portion of the FDA's budget is provided by pharmaceutical companies. NIH is cozy with biomedical and pharmaceutical companies and its scientists are allowed to collect royalties on drugs NIH licenses to pharma. And as the former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), I know the agency can be influenced by special interest groups.

While these three agencies are apparently among the worst offenders, Redfield suggested that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is similarly a "captive of industry."

"To cure our children, we must reevaluate our food choices and the underlying practices of the agricultural sector. We must prioritize wholesome and nutritious food," wrote Redfield.

This is made all the more difficult by deceptive marketing claims. Blaze News recently highlighted the findings of researchers at Australia's George Institute for Global Health, which analyzed 651 foods marketed for babies and toddlers at 10 supermarket chains in the United States.

According to the study, which was published in the peer-reviewed journal Nutrients, 60% of the foods failed to meet international nutritional standards. More than 99% of the baby food analyzed had misleading marketing claims on the labels, in some cases lying about an absence of artificial colors or flavors, and in others lying about an absence of BPA — a lucrative, ubiquitous, and potentially dangerous endocrine disruptor that the FDA still claims is safe.

Redfield concluded his piece, writing, "The exorbitant cost of the failing health of our kids, the needless suffering and death, can be ended by a Kennedy Commission on Childhood Chronic Disease — and the vast burden of chronic disease that now demoralizes and bankrupts our nation can disappear. The key is to see the possible, and lead our nation to act."

'We're in a lot of trouble if he has any role.'

Kennedy revealed on Aug. 23 that a key factor behind his decision to endorse President Donald Trump was the opportunity to help "Make America Healthy Again" in a future Trump administration.

"Don't you want healthy children?" said Kennedy. "And don't you want the chemicals out of our food? And don't you want the regulatory agencies to be free from corporate corruption? And that's what President Trump told me that he wanted."

Kennedy and Trump's joint promise of a healthy America did not appeal to everyone in the medical establishment, which makes most of its money treating chronic ailments.

Robert Murphy, a professor of infectious disease at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, told The Hill, "From a health perspective this would be nothing short of chaos."

"He's proven himself to be a dangerous fanatic who doesn't have a science background and who doesn't believe in science," continued Murphy. "We're in a lot of trouble if he has any role, any leadership position related to many things, but health in particular."

W. Ian Lipkin, the director of the Center for Infection and Immunity at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, told The Hill, "The notion that RFK Jr. would have any say in who's selected [to be part of Trump’s administration] is very worrisome to me and many of my colleagues in public health."

"Many of us are old enough to remember what happened before there was a polio vaccine or a measles vaccine ... there were millions of children that were adversely impacted due to the lack of protection from these types of diseases," added Lipkin.

In fairness to Redfield, Lipkin may have a chip on his shoulder.

After all, unlike Redfield, who appears to likely have been right about the Wuhan lab leak, Lipkin was a prominent zoonotic origins theorist. In fact, he was an author on the "scientifically unsound" "Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" paper that Fauci used on multiple occasions to suggest to the American public that COVID-19 was not a lab leak but rather an animal virus that jumped to a human.

Lipkin joined Kristian Andersen, Edward Holmes, and Robert Garry in concluding, "We do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible."

Prominent scientists have since demanded that Nature Medicine retract the paper "due to multiple ethical violations."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Triple threat: Italian man’s BIZARRE diagnosis after trip to Spain



As the WHO declares monkeypox a global threat in 2024, one story from 2022 is making headlines again.

Two years ago, an Italian man was believed to be the first patient ever diagnosed with monkeypox, COVID-19, and HIV — all at the same time.

While before 2022, it was not believed that COVID-19 and monkeypox infections could occur simultaneously, the man has apparently proven the scientists wrong.

The man reportedly first developed a fever, sore throat, and headaches nine days after returning from a trip to Spain, where he had unprotected sex with other men, and first tested positive for COVID-19 on July 2, 2022.

Within just hours of the positive test, he began developing a rash and painful blisters all over his body before heading to the ER. It was there that he tested positive for monkeypox and learned that he also had HIV.

The 36-year-old’s case is as rare as it is alarming — but Pat Gray of “Pat Gray Unleashed” is far from concerned, at least for himself.

“You might want to, I don’t know, pay attention to your lifestyle a little bit,” Gray says, adding, “HIV and monkeypox are apparently spread in very similar ways.”


Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Disease that wiped out over a third of medieval Europe is back — in Colorado



The plague swept through medieval Europe, killing between 30% to 50% of the population — up to anestimated 200 million people. While the bacterium responsible, Yersinia pestis, is found in rodents, it can be transmitted to humans through the bite of infected fleas. Between humans, it can be spread through unprotected contact with an infected person's bodily fluids or through inhalation of respiratory droplets expelled by someone stricken with the pneumonic plague.

Outbreaks of Yersina pestis were responsible for numerous nightmarish epidemics — not only the Justinianic plague in the 5th-7th centuries and the 14th century Black Death, but also in modern times, largely in Asia and Africa. According to the World Health Organization, the three most endemic countries are Madagascar, Peru, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Public health officials in Pueblo County, Colorado, confirmed Tuesday that a resident was infected with the plague.

Officials did not disclose the identity of the infected person.

'If you develop symptoms of plague, see a health care provider immediately.'

The Pueblo Department of Public Health and Environment advised locals to:

  • eliminate places rodents can breed or hide, such as rock piles, brush, and trash;
  • avoid contact with dead animals;
  • use insect repellent to avoid flea bites;
  • treat pets for fleas;
  • keep pets away from rodent-infested areas, including prairie dog colonies; and
  • don't sleep with pets.

Alice Solis, program manager of the county's office of communicable disease and emergency preparedness, said, "If you develop symptoms of plague, see a health care provider immediately. Plague can be treated successfully with antibiotics, but an infected person must be treated promptly to avoid serious complications or death."

Infection is brutal and frequently lethal. Systemic infection caused by the bacteria in the bloodstream and lung-based forms have a case-fatality ratio ranging from 30% to 100% if not treated.

Symptoms vary depending on the variety of plague.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, those infected with the bubonic plague — which is not spread person to person — develop swollen, tender lymph glands as well as fever, headache, and weakness.

Those with pneumonic plague, which is contagious and spread through the air, suffer chest pain, high fever and chills, a cough, difficulty breathing, and an upset stomach. If untreated, the disease can lead to lung failure, shock, and death inside 24 hours.

When plague bacteria multiply in the blood leaving a patient with septicemic plague, the patient is likely to suffer similar symptoms as well as profuse bleeding.

The U.S. does not presently have a plague vaccine available for use. However, streptomycin, gentamicin, the tetracyclines, and chloramphenicol are reportedly all effective against pneumonic plague.

Although infections are extremely rare, plague occurs naturally in areas of the western United Sates. For instance, it is endemic throughout the Sierra Nevada mountains and other parts of California, where it is often carried by squirrels and chipmunks.

Other once-eradicated or controlled diseases have made a comeback in recent years, in part as a result of unchecked illegal immigration.

Blaze News previously reported that cases of polio, tuberculosis, leprosy, and malaria have cropped up amid record influxes of illegal aliens as well as refugees and asylees — whom the CDC indicated are not required to meet vaccination requirements before entering the country.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze News investigates: BPA is no longer the stuff of baby bottles, but it still might be a big problem



A chemical once commonplace in baby bottles was singled out for concern and investigations in the mid-2000s after it was linked to possible health risks. Selective bans and restrictions on the chemical Bisphenol A soon followed in a number of Western nations.

The perception that sufficient action was ultimately taken largely put the controversy over BPA to bed, although scientists continued looking into BPA's effects on animals — as well as into the impact of its all-too-similar alternatives.

Studies conducted at home and abroad in the years since have highlighted various links between BPA and infertility, obesity, cancer, poor fetal development, early onset puberty, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and other ailments.

While there are outstanding concerns about BPA and its relatives, which are still used in rigid plastic consumer products, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration maintains — to the great chagrin of some scientists — that the chemical is safe "at current levels occurring in foods."

Echoing American scientists ostensibly ignored by their regulator, a European health agency recently sounded the alarm, revealing that exposure is too high and that contrary to the suggestion of the FDA, BPA does pose a danger.

Blaze News recently reached out to the European Food Safety Authority, the FDA, and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences for insights into the current state of scientific knowledge about BPA, the selective reduction in the recommended tolerable daily intake, and possible outstanding risks to the general public.

What is BPA?

BPA is an industrial chemical that has been produced in massive quantities since the 1960s. An estimated 22 billion pounds of BPA are produced a year.

BPA is frequently used as a structural component in clear plastic consumer products, including eye wear, cosmetics, clothing, tableware, thermal paper receipts, water bottles, water pipes, and in the epoxy resins used to line the insides of metal food cans.

The BPA market reportedly accounted for $22.69 billion in 2022 and $23.52 billion last year.

Concerns mounted earlier this century over the likelihood that when BPA leached into the food and drink it was supposed to help contain, it would adversely impact human beings' health, especially that of unborn babies and newborns. In addition to exposure via food, humans can also absorb BPA through the skin.

BPA is a known endocrine disruptor, meaning that it can alter hormone activity thereby adversely impacting various biological processes regulated by the endocrine system, including those related to reproduction — at a time when fertility problems are on the rise.

In its 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicated there were detectable levels of the chemical — which mimics the effects of estrogen in the body — in 93% of over 2,500 urine samples from people over the age of six. Later studies highlighted the presence of BPA in the blood and tissues of adults and children alike, and in breast milk, amniotic fluid, and placental tissue.

Protecting kids

Around the mid-2000s, the controversy around BPA largely centered on its use in baby-related food delivery services and packaging. The U.S. was among the countries that responded to the outrage with investigations and partial bans.

Minnesota passed the first selective state ban on BPA in 2009. Connecticut was reportedly next up, then a dozen more states adopted policies regulating the use of the chemical in consumer products.

Lawmakers and consumer groups across the country leaned on companies to stop manufacturing baby bottles and toddler cups using the chemical ingredient. Companies like Playtex and Gerber obliged them in short order.

Despite the FDA noting in an August 2008 draft report that BPA remained safe in food contact materials — a stance it maintains to this day — it was met with a citizen petition months later from the Natural Resources Defense Council requesting that the Commissioner of Food and Drugs issue a rule barring the use of BPA in human food and packaging and revoking regulations permitting the use of any food additive that might lead to BPA food contamination.

The FDA effectively told the concerned citizens to pound sand and reiterated its commitment to continuing its investigations into the chemical's health effects. In an apparent act of appeasement, the FDA did, however, amend its food additive regulations, effective 2012, to no longer "provide for the use of polycarbonate (PC) resins in infant feeding bottles (baby bottles) and spill-proof cups ... because these uses have been abandoned [by manufacturers]" — not because of safety concerns.

Responding to a petition from Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), the FDA amended its regulations in 2013 to no longer provide for the use of BPA-based epoxy resins in packaging for baby formula.

During the uproar over BPA, other Western nations similarly took precautions even though the science was unsettled.

Canada, for instance, which had been the first country to declare BPA a "dangerous substance," determined that while most citizens had low to very low exposure levels of BPA that ostensibly did not pose a health risk, "There was a potential concern for infants, which led to added protective measures."

The northern nation ultimately made it illegal to manufacture, import, advertise, or sell polycarbonate baby bottles that contain BPA.

In 2011, the European Union banned the use of BPA in baby bottles and toddler cups.

Rat problems

The European Chemicals Agency's Member State Committee unanimously agreed in 2017 that BPA-A is a "substance of very high concern because of its endocrine disrupting properties which cause probably serious effects to human health."

In recent years, other agencies at home and abroad have similarly expressed concern about persisting threats posed by the profitable chemical.

The FDA, however, maintains that "BPA is safe at the current levels occurring in foods," having apparently been unswayed by various recent damning studies, including those which revealed:

In the face of continued disagreements stateside about BPA, the FDA, the NIEHS' National Toxicology Program, and other agencies collaborated on a multi-year rat model-based BPA research program called the "Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on Bisphenol A Toxicity," or CLARITY-BPA.

This multi-agency initiative published its draft core report in 2018 and then a compendium of findings in October 2021.

Blaze News reached out to Dr. Brandy Beverly, a health scientist with the Office of Health Assessment credited with helping design and draft the final BPA report, for comment. A NIEHS spokesman responded and highlighted some interesting takeaways:

  • "The core study showed no changes in brain tissue in rats. University researchers found some structural changes, and they observed alterations in the expression of estrogen and androgen receptors. They also discovered changes in the expression of genes involved in sexual differentiation and neuroendocrine function in the hypothalamus, hippocampus, and amygdala, and limited sex-specific effects on learning and memory, among other results."
  • "Cancer rates in female rats increased following administration of the lowest BPA dose in the core study, but authors of that study concluded that was not due to the chemical because effects were not seen at higher doses. University scientists found that low-level exposure in rodents caused changes in mammary gland development that may contribute to increased cancer risk, whereas higher doses did not cause those changes."
  • "Neither the core study nor the investigative research reported cancerous lesions in rodents following exposure to BPA. However, BPA did increase cancer following a later-life estrogen exposure simulating the aging human male, with the greatest effects observed at the per-day dose of 2.5 micrograms BPA per kilogram body weight. Also, evaluation of the developing male prostate and urethra showed a smaller urethra following exposure to low doses of BPA or ethinylestradiol, a synthetic estrogen."

The spokesman noted that despite the "illuminating" collected findings, the authors of the multi-agency report "did not reach a consensus."

While the FDA subsequently declared BPA "safe for the currently authorized uses in food containers and packaging," there was apparently a great deal of resistance to the regulator's framing.

'Their decisions rely on 4 incorrect assumptions.'

According to a peer-reviewed 2020 review published in the journal Endocrinology, "A majority of the academic scientists that participated in the CLARITY-BPA study disagreed with the FDA's published conclusions."

In the CLARITY-BPA's draft core study report, a "wide range of adverse effects was reported in both the toxicity and the mechanistic endpoints at the lowest dose tested (2.5 micrograms/kg/day), leading independent experts to call for the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) to be dropped 20 000-fold from the current outdated LOAEL of 50 000 micrograms/kg/day," said the review.

"Despite criticism by members of the Endocrine Society that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s assumptions violate basic principles of endocrinology, the FDA rejected all low-dose data as not biologically plausible," said the 2020 study.

'The harmful effects from BPA can occur at minuscule levels.'

Instead, the FDA doubled down on its longstanding position.

"Their decisions rely on 4 incorrect assumptions: dose responses must be monotonic, there exists a threshold below which there are no effects, both sexes must respond similarly, and only toxicological guideline studies are valid," added the review.

The review did not mince words, concluding that the "FDA has abrogated its responsibility to ensure the safety of food and food/beverage packaging in the US, and the FDA continues to allow industry to declare chemicals such as BPA to be safe."

Dr. Linda Birnbaum, former director at NIEHS and NTP, said in a 2022 statement when petitioning the FDA to reconsider the safety of BPA in food packaging, "The scientific evidence is now more than enough to require strict limits on the use of BPA in packaging and plastics that come in contact with our food."

Too much BPA

The European Food Safety Authority, which admittedly applies different methods for quantifying risk in humans than some other major agencies, alternatively concluded last year that BPA is a health concern — not just for unborn babies and newborns, as long suspected — but for all age groups.

It also lowered its estimated tolerable daily intake for BPA 20,000-fold — a decision celebrated by some scientists and criticized by others.

Dr. Claude Lambré, chair of EFSA's Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids, indicated that upon reviewing over 800 BPA studies published since 2013, the panel "observed an increase in the percentage of a type of white blood cell, called T helper, in the spleen. They play a key role in our cellular immune mechanisms and an increase of this kind could lead to the development of allergic lung inflammation and autoimmune disorders."

The potential for autoimmune disorders extra to possible consequences for the reproductive, developmental, and metabolic systems prompted the EFSA to greatly reduce the tolerable daily intake from the figure they set in 2015 and concluded that consumers with "both average and high exposure to BPA in all age groups exceeded the new TDI, indicating health concerns."

"Based on all the new scientific evidence assessed, EFSA's experts established a TDI of 0.2 nanograms (0.2ng or 0.2 billionths of a gram) per kilogram of body weight per day (kg/bw/day), replacing the previous temporary level of 4 micrograms [4,000 nanograms] per kilogram of body weight per day," said the agency.

A 2014 FDA hazard assessment indicated that the estimated dietary intake of BPA was 1.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight a day for children under the age of 2 and 0.5 micrograms for those 2 and older.

An EFSA spokesman clarified to Blaze News that the new TDI represents the amount "that can be ingested daily over a lifetime without presenting an appreciable health risk."

"Exceedance of the Tolerable Daily Intake does not mean consumers face immediate harmful effects," said the spokesman. "Even in the cases where the exposure exceeds the TDI, not all individuals will necessarily develop adverse reactions over time, as is generally true for any chemical exposure. The probability that harmful effects on the immune system would develop over time can be influenced by several factors, including other stressors, genetics and nutrition.”

The EFSA apparently takes "conservative exposure scenarios" to maximize protections for even the most sensitive and vulnerable consumers.

'Studies show BPA can be absorbed into skin in minutes.'

While the EFSA now maintains the BPA is a health concern for people of all age groups, the spokesman informed Blaze News that the "population groups most exceeding the TDI are those with the lowest body weights, so they include infants, toddlers, and children."

When asked whether the FDA should change its position on BPA, the spokesman underscored that while the two health agencies were in regular dialogue, they simply drew different conclusions.

"Different scientists can have different views on methodologies and approaches," said the spokesman. "This is a normal part of the scientific process. This is how science moves forward and develops. Approaches may also differ according to the scope and objectives of different assessments. It is part of a broader conversation within the scientific community on how findings from intermediate endpoints in animals can be integrated into safety assessments in humans."

Blaze News reached out to the FDA about its markedly different view but did not receive comment by deadline.

Protections and protectors

BPA is omnipresent, but there are both groups who continue to flag its presence in various consumer products and ways for people to reduce exposure.

The Center for Environmental Health, a nonprofit watchdog that seeks to protect kids and families from toxic chemicals, is among the groups campaigning against the use of BPA in various products.

In recent years, the CEH has noted the presence of high levels of BPA in various articles of polyester-based clothing with spandex, including socks, sports bras, and athletic shirts. The watchdog went a step further, sending legal notices to various companies, including Patagonia, Sketchers, Nike, Reebok, New Balance, and Activ Pro, noting that their clothing "could expose individuals up to 40 times the safe limit" of BPA, according to California law.

On May 31, the CEH successfully struck a legally binding agreement with 30 companies including Hanes, Victoria's Secret & Co., Asics, and Dollar General, which will apparently reformulate their products accordingly.

"Studies show BPA can be absorbed into skin in minutes. Bisphenols have no place in socks made for adults, children, or babies, whose body systems are only just developing," Shakoora Azimi-Gaylon, senior director of toxic exposure and pollution prevention at the CEH, said in a statement.

The NIEHS has noted some ways to prevent or reduce exposure to BPA:

  • Don't microwave polycarbonate plastic food containers, which can break down over time and at high temperatures.
  • Reduce use of canned foods.
  • When possible, opt for non-plastic containers (e.g., glass, porcelain, or steel), especially for hot foods.
  • Check packaging to indicate it is BPA free.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'NIAID cannot be trusted': Fauci's agency planned to make monkeypox more deadly, says congressional report



The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases under Anthony Fauci funded deadly gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the likely epicenter of the pandemic. Although millions of Americans died from COVID-19, the NIAID apparently did not learn its lesson.

According to congressional investigators, the NIAID received approval to execute radical gain-of-function experiments on MPXV, the virus that causes monkeypox.

Monkeypox is endemic in various African regions but made a global play in April 2022. The New England Journal of Medicine indicated on the basis of diagnoses in 16 countries that 98% of the persons infected with the virus were homosexual.

Those infected with monkeypox often experience a painful rash that can look like pimples or blisters, respiratory problems, exhaustion, fever, swollen lymph nodes, and chills. Like COVID-19, monkeypox can be spread via respiratory droplets, through "direct contact with a rash or sores of someone who has the virus," and through "contact with clothing, bedding, and other items used by a person" with the virus.

While it's unclear what nightmarish symptoms a lab-engineered version of monkeypox could produce, it's clear that some of Fauci's people were eager to find out.

Over the past two years, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce — which has jurisdiction over public health agencies — has been looking into a particular research project that was "planned and/or conducted" at the NIAID prior to Fauci's retirement.

Committee members were alerted to the experiment by a Sept. 15, 2022, interview in Science magazine, in which Dr. Bernard Moss, a NIAID pox virologist, revealed that his team was working on endowing a West African variant of monkeypox responsible for the global outbreak at the time, "clade 2," with genes from a far more deadly variant, "clade 1."

Whereas clade 2 has roughly a 1% mortality rate, clade 2 reportedly has a mortality rate ranging from 10%-15%.

Congressional investigators noted that Moss' admission troubled some of his peers.

Epidemiologist Thomas Inglesby, director of the Center for Health Security at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, told the magazine the following month that if a more powerful version of the outbreak strain ever escaped the NIAID lab, it could trigger an "epidemic with substantially more lethality."

The committee noted in an interim staff report Tuesday, "If the experiment transferred genes from clade IIb MPXV — which caused the 2022-2023 mpox epidemic — into clade I virus, the resulting chimeric virus could have a reproductive number (R₀) of 1.10 to 2.40 coupled with a case fatality rate of 10 – 15 percent in the unvaccinated."

According to the interim report, the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, and the NIAID "repeatedly obstructed and misled" the committee about the experiment referenced by Moss in Science.

'NIAID cannot be trusted to oversee its own research of pathogens responsibly.'

Whereas HHS and the NIH denied that that the experiment(s) had been proposed, planned, approved, or conducted, the committee noted that internal NIH documents "show this experiment was formally proposed and received approval before the NIH's Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) on June 30, 2015."

HHS Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs Melanie Egorin confirmed in a March 19 letter to the committee that the experiment was greenlit.

The committee has been unable to confirm whether or not the dangerous experiment actually took place but indicated there was a window of time between June 2015 and May 2023 when researchers could have done so.

In the first three years, there were reportedly no requirements imposed on the experiment. In 2018, scientists were asked only to notify the NIH's IBC when getting ready to make clade 2 more potent.

Science indicated that at the very least, part of the experiment was conducted. Researchers moved genes from clade 2 to clade 1.

"The deliberate, prolonged effort to deceive the Committee is unacceptable and potentially criminal," said the interim report. "HHS, the NIH, and NIAID continue to insist the GOFROC experiment transferring material from clade I into clade II was never conducted, despite being approved for a period of over eight years. However, HHS has repeatedly refuse to produce any documents to corroborate this claim."

The report suggested that the refusal to cough up evidence might suggest "that the information not produced was unfavorable" and that the HHS is effectively lying.

Despite painting HHS as obstructionist, the report emphasized that the "NIAID is the agency that bears the most responsibility for misleading the Committee."

The primary conclusion drawn at this point in the investigation is that NIAID cannot be trusted to oversee its own research of pathogens responsibly. It cannot be trusted to determine whether an experiment on a potential pandemic pathogen or enhanced potential pandemic pathogen poses unacceptable biosafety risk or a serious public health threat. Lastly, NIAID cannot be trusted to honestly communicate with Congress and the public about controversial GOFROC experiments.

Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) said of the report, "In order to start rebuilding trust in our government health agency guidance, agencies like the NIH must be honest and transparent with Congress and the American people."

"This report demonstrates a disturbing lack of judgment and accountability from HHS, the NIH, and particularly, NIAID. It is unacceptable and demonstrates the clear need for reform," added Rodgers.

Justin Goodman, senior vice president of the White Coat Waste Project — a watchdog that helped expose EcoHealth Alliance's and Fauci's ties to the gain-of-function experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology — told Blaze News, "These treacherous monkeypox gain-of-function experiments are the latest example of Fauci's rampant waste, fraud, and abuse and disregard for taxpayers and lawmakers."

"Even though Fauci is gone from government, his atrocious animal testing legacy is alive and well, and we're working with Republicans and Democrats to cut NIH's reckless spending," continued Goodman. "The solution is simple: Stop the money. Stop the madness."

An HHS spokesman said in a statement, "The committee is looking for an issue where there isn't one. HHS and its divisions, including NIH, follow strict biosafety measures as our scientists work to better understand and protect the public from infectious diseases — like mpox."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FDA approves new Moderna mRNA vaccine without bothering with independent advisers



The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved Moderna's mRNA-1345 vaccine, which allegedly protects adults aged 60 and older from respiratory syncytial virus infection-caused lower respiratory tract disease.

The agency's breakthrough therapy designation approval for the drug, which will be marketed as mResvia, is only the second Moderna drug the FDA has approved. More significantly, it is the first mRNA vaccine to have been approved to address a disease other than COVID-19.

'We did not refer your application to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.'

Even though that amounts to a big step, it appears the regulator was keen to jump past additional levels of scrutiny.

The FDA noted in its Friday approval letter, "We did not refer your application to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee because our review of information submitted in your [biologics license application], including the clinical study design and trial results, did not raise concerns or controversial issues that would have benefited from an advisory committee discussion."

The advisory committee's job is to review and evaluate data concerning the "safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of vaccines and related biological products," then provide independent expert advice to the agency.

According to the pharmaceutical company, the approval was based on "positive data from the Phase 3 clinical trial ConquerRSV, a global study conducted in approximately 37,000 adults ages 60 or older in 22 countries."

Nearly 20,000 of the trial participants were based in the United States. There are at least 11 other studies under way examining the impact of the novel drug on other demographics.

The company claimed in a Feb. 29 overview of its trial data that the vaccine "continued to be efficacious through median 8.6 months follow-up" and was shown to prevent severe RSV disease "base on analysis of shortness of breath and medically attended RSV-[lower respiratory tract disease]."

The vaccine's efficacy is allegedly 83.7%. Reuters noted, however, that the label indicates the shot is only 79% effective at preventing at least two symptoms of RSV, such as fever and cough.

While the overview insisted that the vaccine was relatively effective and safe, it nevertheless highlighted a number of "systemic reactions" reported within seven days of vaccination, such as headache, fatigue, myalgia, arthralgia, and chills, besides customary injection site pain.

A Moderna-funded study published in the New England Journal of Medicine similarly alleged that a single dose of the vaccine "resulted in no evident safety concerns."

Despite similarly having been presented as a safe vaccine, Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine was linked in various studies, including in an FDA-funded study, to an increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly in men ages 18-25.

Extra to heart inflammation, the Global COVID Vaccine Safety Project — a Global Vaccine Data Network initiative supported by both the CDC and the Department of Health and Human Services — revealed in a February study in the esteemed journal Vaccine that "Bell's palsy had an increased [observed to expected] ratio after a first dose of [Pfizer's] BNT162b2 and [Moderna's] mRNA-1273."

The study also noted that "there were also increased OE ratios for febrile seizures following a first and second dose of mRNA-1273 ... and for generalized seizures following first mRNA-1273 dose and fourth BNT162b2 dose."

Blaze News previously reported that the University of Auckland, which hosts the Global Vaccine Data Network, noted that there were safety signals for "acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (inflammation and swelling in the brain and spinal cord) after viral vector and mRNA vaccines."

Despite outstanding concerns about its only other approved vaccine, Moderna appears confident in its product and has evidently secured the FDA's confidence as well. Its next stop is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whose Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices will review the vaccine during its June 26-27 meeting.

Analysts estimate Moderna will do roughly $340 million in RSV vaccine sales this year and possibly $830.5 million in 2025, reported Reuters.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Massive study identifies 32 harmful health conditions directly linked to the consumption of ultra-processed food



A troubling new peer-reviewed study, the largest of its kind, has revealed that ultra-processed food is linked to 32 harmful health conditions and can significantly increase the risk of cancer, diabetes, and an early grave.

The study, a systematic meta-analysis published Wednesday in the BMJ, the British Medical Association's esteemed journal, found evidence pointing to "direct associations between greater exposure to ultra-processed foods and higher risks of all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease related mortality, common mental disorder outcomes, overweight and obesity, and type 2 diabetes."

The fallout of ultra-processed food exposure may be far-reaching granted the global shift in recent years from unprocessed and minimally processed foods to UPFs. According to the study, the present "share of dietary energy derived from ultra-processed foods ranges from 42% and 58% in Australia and the United States."

The study, involving experts from various top institutions, including Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Sorbonne University in France, relies on the definition of "ultra-processed foods" advanced in the Nova food classification system.

According to the Nova system, processed foods usually consist of a primary plant or animal substance to which one or more culinary ingredient — such as oil, butter, sugar, or salt — has been added. An ultra-processed food, alternatively, is not a modified primary material but rather an industrial composite of often chemically manipulated substances that have been extracted from foods, derived from food constituents, and/or cooked up in a laboratory.

UPFs appear in virtually every aisle in the grocery store. They include packaged snacks, soft drinks, instant noodles, sweetened cereals, packaged baked goods, frozen fish sticks, oven-ready pizzas, breakfast bars, and ready-made meals.

Researchers examined the findings of 14 meta-analysis studies published over the past three years with 45 distinct pooled analyses. In 87% of the pooled analyses, estimates of UPF exposure were obtained on the basis of food frequency questionnaires, 24-hour dietary recalls, and participants' dietary history.

Researchers found UPF exposure was consistently associated with 32 adverse health outcomes, including all-cause mortality; cancer-related deaths; cardiovascular disease-related deaths; heart disease-related deaths; breast cancer; central nervous system tumors; chronic lymphocytic leukemia; colorectal cancer; pancreatic cancer; prostate cancer; adverse sleep-related outcomes; anxiety; common mental disorder outcomes; depression; asthma; wheezing; Crohn's disease; ulcerative colitis; obesity; hypertension; and type 2 diabetes.

"On the basis of the random effects model, 32 (71%) distinct pooled analyses showed direct associations between greater ultra-processed food exposure and a higher risk of adverse health outcomes," said the study. "Additionally, of these combined analyses, 11 (34%) showed continued statistical significance when a more stringent threshold was applied."

Heart disease-related death, cardiovascular disease-related death, all-cause mortality, type 2 diabetes, wheezing, and depression were among the 11 adverse health outcomes that showed continued statistical significance in the face of the more stringent threshold.

The Guardian noted that evidence graded as "convincing" in the study indicated that higher UPF exposure was linked to a roughly 50% increase in cardiovascular-related death, a 48-53% higher risk of anxiety and mental disorders, and a 12% increase risk of diabetes.

"Across the pooled analyses, greater exposure to ultra-processed foods, whether measured as higher versus lower consumption, additional servings per day, or a 10% increment, was consistently associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes," added the study.

In a corresponding editorial in BMJ, a pair of Brazilian academics stressed that UPFs "are engineered to be highly desirable, combining sugar, fat, and salt to maximize reward, and adding flavors that induce eating when not hungry. Many are addictive, judged by the standards set for tobacco products, and aggressively marketed with meal deals, super sizing, and advertising."

The Brazilians suggested that investment management companies and manufacturers would "likely resist" efforts to control and reduce the production and consumption of UPFs. With the tobacco parallel in mind, the Brazilian duo recommended rolling out national dietary guidelines cautioning against UPF consumption; prohibiting sales of junk food near schools and hospitals; and regulating UPF marketing.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CDC confirms spread of 'unknown' outbreak on cruise ship



The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed the spread of an "unknown" outbreak on a cruise ship.

The outbreak on the Queen Victoria cruise ship was first reported in early February when 15 people suffered from an undiagnosed illness.

Passengers on the cruise ship suffered from symptoms such as vomiting and diarrhea.

However, the mystery illness quickly spread throughout the cruise ship.

The CDC reported that at least 154 people had been stricken with a sickness – 129 passengers and 25 crew members.

There are 1,824 passengers and 967 crew members aboard the cruise ship.

Despite investigating the illness more than two weeks ago, the CDC said that the cause of the outbreak is "unknown."

The outbreak is being monitored by the CDC's Vessel Sanitation Program, which "helps the cruise ship industry prevent and control the introduction, transmission, and spread of gastrointestinal illnesses on cruise ships."

Cunard Cruise Line, which operates the Queen Victoria, said it had increased cleaning and disinfection procedures, isolated ill passengers and crew, and "notified current and embarking passengers and crew of the situation onboard and encouraged prompt illness reporting and good hand hygiene."

According to Cruise Mapper, the Queen Victoria cruise ship is currently on a 55-day voyage that began on Jan. 22 in Hamburg, Germany. On Tuesday, the ship arrives at its next port of call in Apia in the South Pacific island nation of Samoa. The cruise ends on March 4 in Sydney, Australia.

The Epoch Times reported, "While the CDC report still hasn’t revealed the cause of the Cunard cruise ship’s outbreak, norovirus has been the most common source of illnesses on cruise ships in recent years."

The CDC defines norovirus as: "A very contagious virus that causes vomiting and diarrhea. Anyone can get infected and sick with norovirus. Norovirus is sometimes called the 'stomach flu' or 'stomach bug.' However, norovirus illness is not related to the flu, which is caused by influenza virus."

The health agency noted that most norovirus outbreaks in the United States happen between November and April.

There is a yearly average of around 20 million who get infected by norovirus, 109,000 hospitalizations, and 900 norovirus deaths – mostly among adults aged 65 and older.

Norovirus is prevalent on cruise ships because of close living quarters and new people boarding the ship.

The CDC reported 14 illness outbreaks on cruise ships in 2023. Norovirus was the cause on 13 occasions and the other was caused by E. coli and salmonella.

This year, there has already been one norovirus outbreak on a cruise ship.

In January, a norovirus outbreak struck the Celebrity Constellation cruise ship. There were 92 passengers and eight crew members who fell ill.

Like Blaze News? Circumvent the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden DOJ sues Tennessee over law penalizing prostitutes who knowingly expose others to HIV — claims it's discriminatory



HIV is an incurable auto-immune disease that afflicts roughly 1.2 million Americans, predominantly non-straight men. The Biden Department of Justice wants to eliminate a law in Tennessee that might spare countless more Americans from contracting it.

A year after suing Tennessee over its ban on child sex-changes, the Biden DOJ has sued the state again, this time in hopes of killing a state law that makes prostitution a Class C felony if a person knowingly infected with HIV engages "in sexual activity as a business or is an inmate in a house of prostitution."

The law was reportedly reclassified as a "violent sexual offense" in 2010 due to the grievous, lasting physical harm it can result in. As a result, those so convicted are required to register as sex offenders.

According to the complaint filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Tennessee and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation "unlawfully discriminate against individuals with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a disability, in their maintenance and enforcement of Tennessee's aggravated prostitution statute."

The lawsuit downplays the risks associated with HIV — a lifelong disease for which antiretroviral therapeutics cost potential sufferers anywhere from $1,800 to $4,500 every month — and takes issue with the requirement that persons convicted of aggravated prostitution must register as sex offenders. After all, this can impact convicts' employment potential and precludes convicts from hanging out alone with children in secluded areas.

The lawsuit cites a nameless black transvestite as a complainant "aggrieved" by the law. He was arrested in 2010 for prostitution "near a church or school" and pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated prostitution, having engaged in sex for money despite knowing he had HIV since 2008.

The transvestite alleges that as a result of the law — contra his conscious decision to sell sex while infected with a debilitating disease — he now has trouble finding employment because of his sex offender listing in the TBI's registry; is precluded from spending time alone with his nephew; and cannot change his name to "match [his] gender identity."

The DOJ claims that the TBI and the State of Tennessee are violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by continuing to enforce the statute.

The aim of the lawsuit is to nullify the law; to remove all relevant convicts from the TBI's sex offender registry; and to shake the state up for damages for "Complainant A and other aggrieved individuals with aggravated prostitution convictions."

"The enforcement of state criminal laws that treat people differently based on HIV status alone and that are not based on actual risks of harm, discriminate against people living with HIV," said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the DOJ's so-called Civil Rights Division. "People living with HIV should not be subjected to a different system of justice based on outdated science and misguided assumptions. This lawsuit reflects the Justice Department’s commitment to ensuring that people living with HIV are not targeted because of their disability."

Brandon James Smith, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti's chief of staff, said in a statement obtained by the Associated Press, "We are aware of the DOJ's findings, will give them appropriate consideration, and look forward to finding out more about DOJ's apparent cooperation with local activist organizations and private litigants related to this matter."

Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) suggested the DOJ's lawsuit was evidence that "the fight is not in Washington. The fight is with Washington."

The ACLU and the Transgender Law Center beat the Biden DOJ to the punch on attempting to decriminalize prostitutes' intentional exposure of unsuspecting strangers to HIV. The Hill reported that the radical groups filed the challenge in the U.S. District in Memphis on behalf of four plaintiffs and OUTMemphis in October 2023.

The complaint indicated that there were just over 80 potential super spreaders registered for aggravated prostitution in the state.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FACT CHECK: Is The World Health Organization Demanding Surveillance Powers For ‘Disease Control’?

The claim stems from a website that is known for spreading misinformation