Former Dallas Fed head warns the US regional banking crisis is 'more serious than we currently understand'



There have been three major bank failures so far this year, and some experts claim the carnage may not yet be at an end.

Former Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Robert Kaplan told Bloomberg Television this week that he thinks "the banking situation may well be more serious than we currently understand."

Silicon Valley Bank collapsed in March, marking the second-largest bank failure in U.S. history. Signature Bank, which had $110 billion in assets at the end of 2022, making it the 29th largest U.S. bank at the time, failed shortly thereafter.

Americans have pulled nearly $100 billion out of banks since, according to Fox Business.

Biden Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen claimed in mid-March that the "banking system is sound." However, just weeks later, First Republic Bank, which had assets over $200 billion and catered to wealthy elites, similarly failed.

First Republic's demise represented the second-largest banking failure in American history, trailing the 2008 collapse of Washington Mutual.

Over the weekend, regulators seized First Republic and sold the bank's deposits and a "substantial majority of assets" to JPMorgan Chase, the largest U.S. bank. JPMorgan similarly absorbed Washington Mutual after its collapse.

Echoing Yellen's March claim, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon suggested Monday that the primary phase of the regional bank crisis was "over," reported the Guardian.

"There may be another smaller one, but this pretty much resolves them all," Dimon said. "This part of the crisis is over."

Tomasz Piskorski, a professor of real estate in the finance division at Columbia University, told Bloomberg, "There are a lot of signs telling us the U.S. banking system is in distress. ... We might want to close our eyes and pretend nothing’s happened, but the signs are already there."

CNBC reported that bank stocks fell dramatically Tuesday, in part because confidence remains shaken and pressure on the sector continues to build.

For instance, shares of the California-based PacWest Bancorp fell nearly 28% on Tuesday. The stock was halted for volatility on a number of occasions.

Shares of Western Alliance bank dropped 15%.

The SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF fell 6.3%.

\u201cBREAKING: US Banking Crisis - Bank Shares Plummet \n\nShares of major U.S. regional banks fell further on Tuesday in the aftermath of the collapse of First Republic Bank, the largest U.S. bank failure since the 2008 financial crisis.\n\nShares of PacWest Bancorp tumbled nearly 30%,\u2026\u201d
— Mario Nawfal (@Mario Nawfal) 1683043099

According to Time, investors and analysts remain concerned about banks such as Comerica and KeyCorp, which — like SVB and Signature Bank — have a large number of accounts with deposits over the federally insured level of $250,000.

CNBC indicated that this concern can be attributed to the recent failures, the expected regulatory changes they have prompted, and prospective Fed rate hikes.

Former Dallas Fed president Robert Kaplan suggested that as far as the regional banking crisis goes, it would be ill advised for the Federal Reserve to continue its rate hike campaign.

The Fed is expected to raised its benchmark rate by 0.25 percentage points on May 3.

"I’d prefer to do what’s called the hawkish pause, not raise but signal that we are in a tightening stance," Kaplan told Bloomberg. "It is more important to be able to sustain the current rate for an extended period of time, longer than the market thinks, than to get another 25-50 basis points and risk having to cut again. I think that will be very troubling."

Economist Peter St Onge of the Heritage Foundation noted Monday that thousands of banks are "in trouble because of the fastest rate hikes in 50 years [which] crashed their bonds, impaired their loans, and vaporized the easy profits they were making paying depositors pennies."

Onge further claimed that virtually every bank in America loaded up on expensive bonds "to park the influx of pandemic-era deposits" then lost "hundreds of billions as rates went up. American banks are now sitting on at least $620 billion of unrealized hidden losses. So First Republic was about 5% of that and we've got 95% to go."

\u201cFirst Republic bailed out for $63 billion\u201d
— Peter St Onge, Ph.D. (@Peter St Onge, Ph.D.) 1682944624

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

Twitter reinstates two esteemed doctors who had been banned for COVID 'misinformation'



Drs. Peter McCullough and Robert Malone were reinstated to Twitter Monday night. Both had been kicked off the platform for allegedly spreading misinformation and for challenging the establishment narrative concerning pharmaceutical responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The restoration of their accounts, which some critics reportedly have suggested will cause harm, comes amid a campaign under the social media platform's new leadership to ostensibly foster and protect free speech — an initiative once called into question by one of the former Twitter exiles.

What are the details?

Robert Malone, a biochemist involved in the invention of the mRNA vaccine platform, had his account banned late last December for "violating [Twitter] policy on spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19."

Upon learning of his ban, Malone, branded a "Covid Misinformation Star" by the New York Times, wrote on his Substack, "We all knew it would happen eventually. Today it did."

"Over a half million followers gone in a blink of an eye. That means I must have been on the mark, so to speak. ... It also means we lost a critical component in our fight to stop these vaccines being mandated for children and to stop the corruption in our governments, as well as the medical-industrial complex and pharmaceutical industries," Malone added.

The ban took place ahead of Malone's appearance on the "Joe Rogan Experience," which was entered into the congressional record by Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) after both YouTube and Twitter removed the interview from their platforms.

Malone suggested to Rogan that he might have prompted the final censorial response when he referenced on Twitter a "fantastic video" put out by the Canadian COVID Care Alliance group detailing alleged "malfeasance and data manipulations, misinterpretations associated with the Pfizer vaccines and their clinical trials," which he conceded may have been "interpreted as something that would cause people to become vaccine hesitant."

Cardiologist Peter McCullough is the former vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center, an author of roughly 677 medical publications in peer-reviewed journals, one of the world's most cited medical experts, and a medical practitioner who treated COVID-19 patients. He had his account permanently suspended on Oct. 6.

At the time, McCullough told the Falun Gong-run broadcaster NTD, "This is just another example of medical censorship by Big Tech on doctors who have the freedom, according to the First Amendment, to express their scientific views through freedom of speech."

Their reinstatements come after Twitter dissolved its Trust and Safety Council, first formed in 2016.

Back in the saddle

In his first tweet after reinstatement, McCullough wrote, "Alright everyone, I am back on Twitter! Let's see my verification and completely uncensored, no unfollow programs, no bots assigned to me, and absolutely no shadow-banning. Let the world hear the medical truth (98% want it) on the pandemic and more!"

McCullough proceeded to promote his socials and note that if Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who visited Twitter's headquarters on Saturday, had something to do with his "release" then he is "indebted."

After calling for other silenced medical professionals to be permitted back on Twitter, the cardiologist went on to tweet, "Since Twitter struck me down, I have come back even more powerful, more than @elonmusk can ever know! Let's join forces to break the psychological-pathological spell of the bio-pharmaceutical complex and get the world back on its axis!"

\u201cSince Twitter struck me down, I have come back even more powerful, more than @elonmusk can ever know! Let's join forces to break the psychological-pathological spell of the bio-pharmaceutical complex and get the world back on its axis!\u201d
— Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH\u2122 (@Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH\u2122) 1670942451

Upon his return, Malone similarly called for the restoration of other suspended doctors' accounts.

After retweeting a post accusing Dr. Anthony Fauci of causing "more harm to humanity than any other scientist in history," the biochemist also responded to critiques of his reinstatement, writing, "Well, there are still the usual Twitter trolls tossing old corporate media hit pieces and snark at me. What they do not know is that our lawsuit against the WaPo is progressing, and we are biding our time for many others including the Atlantic and the NYT. Truth is like a lion."

\u201cWell, there are still the usual Twitter trolls tossing old corporate media hit pieces and snark at me. What they do not know is that our lawsuit against the WaPo is progressing, and we are biding our time for many others including the Atlantic and the NYT. Truth is like a lion.\u201d
— Robert W Malone, MD (@Robert W Malone, MD) 1670942115

It is unclear whether Malone's reinstatement will affect his previous distrust for Twitter CEO Elon Musk.

Malone penned an opinion piece for LifeSite in October, suggesting that Elon Musk does not really care "about scientists' and conservatives' ability to interact on the social media app."

The biochemist accused Musk of seeking to "bring social media, banking, auto loans, Amazon type buying, insurance, paying loans and utility bills, medical insurance, service estimates, you name it, under the umbrella of Twitter. Everything you do, buy, or need could be bought on the Twitterverse. This is about power and money."

Poynter writer offers glowing analysis of Jen Psaki, declares that she 'will go down as one of the best to ever hold the title of White House press secretary'



Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones offered a glowing job performance review of White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki in a piece on Thursday, declaring that she "will go down as one of the best to ever hold the title of White House press secretary."

Psaki, who has served in the role since the beginning of President Joe Biden's administration, participated in her final White House press briefing on Friday. Karine Jean-Pierre will fill the role going forward.

"Psaki has restored honor, dignity and class to the White House briefing room after four years of Donald Trump press secretaries, who seemed more interested in picking fights and criticizing the media than effectively communicating that administration’s policies and agenda," Jones wrote. "Psaki was consistently prepared, effective in communicating for the president and, even when sparring with media members, always respectful."

"Psaki will go down as one of the best to ever hold the title of White House press secretary. Even when Chris Wallace was at Fox News, a frequent critic of the current administration, he called Psaki one of the best ever."https://www.poynter.org/commentary/2022/jen-psakis-legacy-one-of-the-best-press-secretaries-ever/\u00a0\u2026
— Poynter (@Poynter) 1652377059

"Psaki was certainly a welcome change from her immediate predecessor, Kayleigh McEnany, who goes down as one of the most incompetent press secretaries ever," Jones wrote. McEnany served as White House press secretary during a portion of President Donald Trump's tenure in office.

Fox News reporter Peter Doocy, who sometimes sparred with Psaki during briefings , posted a photo of himself with Psaki on Friday: "End of an era in the Brady briefing room! Good luck, @jrpsaki," Doocy tweeted.

End of an era in the Brady briefing room! Good luck, @jrpsakipic.twitter.com/xr8bzLaA65
— Peter Doocy (@Peter Doocy) 1652467448

Last month, Politico quoted a reporter saying that, "Jawing with Jen just makes you look like an asshole."

"Jen [Psaki] is very good at her job, which is unfortunate," the reporter said, according to Politico. "And the work is a lot less rewarding, because you’re no longer saving democracy from Sean Spicer and his Men’s Wearhouse suit. Jawing with Jen just makes you look like an asshole." The outlet did not identify the reporter being quoted. Sean Spicer served as White House press secretary during a portion of the Trump administration.

"Jen Psaki has set the standard for returning decency, respect and decorum to the White House Briefing Room. I want to say thank you to Jen for raising the bar, communicating directly and truthfully to the American people, and keeping her sense of humor while doing so," President Biden said in a statement earlier this month.

Climate activist chains himself to building, weeps as he speaks of impending 'f***ing catastrophe': 'We’re going to lose everything'



A progressive climate activist recently handcuffed himself to a J.P. Morgan Chase building in Los Angeles, California, to protest government and corporate inaction on climate change.

What are the details?

Peter Kalmus, a data scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, also wept as he spoke amid the demonstration, lamenting that the earth his heading toward a "f***king catastrophe" but that no one is listening to him and others in the scientific community.

"I'm willing to take a risk for this gorgeous planet, for my sons," Kalmus said, trying to hold back tears, according to video posted on social media by the Climate Ad Project.

"We're going to lose everything," he gloomily predicted.

Here's a video of the action we took in Los Angelespic.twitter.com/TlYrwwGB8v
— Peter Kalmus (@Peter Kalmus) 1649878104

"We've been trying to warn you guys for so many decades that we're heading towards a f***ing catastrophe, and we've been being ignored," he continued after gathering his emotions. "The scientists of the world are being ignored, and it's got to stop. We're not joking. We're not lying. We're not exaggerating."

Kalmus — who lists his location on Twitter as "Colonized Hahamog'na land, CA" — was joined in protest by physicist Greg Spooner, science educator Allan Chornack, and engineer Eric Gill, according to Business Insider.

Others involved in the protest complained about their failures to motivate collective action despite trying to be "unbiased," "silent," and utilizing "celebrities."

"We've tried everything!" Chornack angrily shouted through a megaphone.

What's the background?

The demonstration appeared to be coordinated by a group called Scientist Rebellion, a branch of Extinction Rebellion that empowers concerned scientists and activists to commit acts of civil disobedience to advocate for climate action.

According to the Smithsonian magazine, the group was responsible for coordinating protests involving more than 1,000 scientists from 25 countries earlier this month.

The protests followed the release of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) latest report, which warned that radical cuts to greenhouse gas emissions are needed by 2025 to ward off catastrophic climate effects.

Kalmus and others reportedly targeted J.P. Morgan Chase because of the massive banking company's alleged excessive funding of fossil fuels.

He and his companions were eventually arrested by police for blocking the entrance to the bank's building but were released from custody shortly after. Ever since, Kalmus has been rattling off tweets complaining about the lack of media coverage the protests are getting.

"This is the biggest story in all of human history, yet it makes less of a dent in the news cycle than Will Smith," he wrote in one tweet.

This is the biggest story in all of human history, yet it makes less of a dent in the news cycle than Will Smithpic.twitter.com/vlp1b9Q0KK
— Peter Kalmus (@Peter Kalmus) 1649136194

"Shouldn't over 1,000 scientists risking arrest to save the planet be a bigger news story than Elon Musk trying to buy Twitter?" he said later.

Shouldn't over 1,000 scientists risking arrest to save the planet be a bigger news story than Elon Musk trying to buy Twitter?
— Peter Kalmus (@Peter Kalmus) 1649979100

Horowitz: The stifling of COVID treatment: The case study of aspirin



The war on all information that might help COVID patients survive wasn’t just limited to prescription drugs. There has been a complete blackout on over-the-counter supplements and common medicines that the public is very familiar with and that are readily available, which together could have reduced the mortality burden. A new study published in the heavy-hitting Journal of the American Medical Association demonstrates that it is criminal how to this day our government has failed to advise people on the simple use of aspirin at first sign of COVID.

Like many other people, Advil is my first go-to medication when I feel feverish. Yet when I thought I had COVID in July 2020 (I ultimately didn’t), even this non-doctor was familiar with the already robust academic literature behind the use of aspirin for COVID. So, I went out to the pharmacy and bought some aspirin. Now, a new study published in JAMA by George Washington University researchers shows a modest decrease in mortality just from this well-known over-the-counter drug even in those already hospitalized. Imagine if everyone had been instructed to have it on hand at the first sign of trouble.

The very large retrospective cohort study shows a 13.5% decrease in mortality among hospitalized patients who were administered a baby aspirin per day. The benefit observed was even higher among those with comorbidities. Additionally, and not surprisingly, the study found a 29% decrease in incidence of pulmonary embolism, which is a very common factor landing COVID patients in the ICU. The analysis looked at 112,269 hospitalized patients across 64 different U.S. health systems from January through September 2021. No extra incidence of adverse events was observed in the treatment group.

A separate smaller study conducted by the same lead author published last April of patients in 2020 found an even greater benefit, possibly because the original strain was less aggressive. In the underpowered study, aspirin use was associated with a decreased risk of mechanical ventilation by 44 percent, ICU admission by 43 percent, and in-hospital mortality by 47 percent.

It is criminal that it has taken two years to get out this information. Moreover, these significant but relatively modest results were among those already hospitalized, and the dosage was just 80mg. Most of the doctors who aggressively treated COVID recommend taking aspirin from day one outpatient at the first sign of trouble. One could likely assume that the outcomes would be even better with the higher dose and earlier use before the micro-clotting set in with many hospitalized patients. Dr. Peter McCullough, a well-published cardiologist and internist who developed one of the earliest treatment protocols, noted that daily aspirin was part of his protocol for COVID patients already in 2020.

Chow et al, ANCHOR Investigators, ASA modest late impact. In "McCullough Protocol" since 2020 but much better to start in first three days of illness before microthrombi induced hypoxemia develops. Our dose has been 325 mg given very high UTXA2/B2 found in preclinical studies.pic.twitter.com/cUwSxhl8Gw
— Peter McCullough, MD MPH (@Peter McCullough, MD MPH) 1648217958

McCullough also told me that “the fact that aspirin did anything with inpatient mortality given that 98% of those in the study already received Lovenox, a strong blood thinner, speaks to the possibility of early aspirin at home having a much greater chance at beneficial outcomes.”

It should not have taken nearly two years for this information to be published in a high-impact journal, and even then, there are no signs of anyone in the medical establishment or NIH recommending its use.

Although acute COVID seemed to cause severe pulmonary inflammation and fibrosis, it was observed early on in the pandemic that many people ultimately died from blood clotting. This is why Dr. Pierre Kory, co-founder of the FLCCC, tells me, “Aspirin was a part of our early treatment protocol from day one.”

Dr. Bryan Tyson, who treated thousands at his urgent care in El Centro, California, used aspirin at the first stages of the pandemic and advised patients to take it for a while. “We started using full aspirin outpatient on our high-risk patients for 30-60 days depending on risk factors, and we never had a patient develop a pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis or heart attacks,” said one of America’s most prolific COVID doctors. “We knew the spike protein was thrombotic, so we were more apt to use the full dose of aspirin.” Tyson, who is running for Congress in CA-25, believes it is criminal negligence for the medical professional not to pre-emptively treat the thrombosis, which can loom early in the disease and persist for quite some time afterwards.

This demonstrates that the war on hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin had nothing to do with something inherent in those drugs. We have witnessed the same blackout on non-prescription treatments such as NAC, vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, quercetin, Pepcid, and betadine nasal/oral rinse. Imagine a multipronged approach, with several of these plus some anti-inflammatory prescriptions early on. Well, that’s why Dr. Tyson had such an amazing success rate treating 7,000 patients.

Most of these treatments were downright attacked. Right as some of the studies were coming out about aspirin, the entire media bizarrely conducted a coordinated attack on Oct. 12, 2021, when the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force reversed decades of protocol and recommended against using aspirin to prevent heart attacks and strokes. Suddenly, anything that may be used for COVID turns into poison overnight!

The media has also savagely attacked the use of betadine nasal rinse, which studies have shown has tremendous benefit for killing the viral load early on.

Thus, whether it’s broadly beneficial supplements and vitamins, cheap over-the-counter medications, safe prescription drugs, or experimental drugs used specifically for respiratory distress, nothing that actually might work need apply for approval. After all, they can only have an emergency if the public is kept in the dark on how to deal with it on their own.

'This is GOLD': NYT asks Candace Owens where she gets her ideas about Ukraine — and immediately regrets it



Daily Wire host Candace Owens tweeted Monday that the New York Times sent her a message asking where she got her ideas that "Ukraine was a corrupt country," adding that such ideas are similar to those "seen from Russian state media." Owen's response was gloriously embarrassing — for the New York Times.

Received an email from The NYTimes asking for comment regarding me \u201cadvancing ideas that Ukraine is a corrupt country\u201d\u2014similar to Russian state TV. \n\nI replied informing them that I actually got my ideas from the New York Times, and provided them links to their past articles. pic.twitter.com/Zy6a7Btih4
— Candace Owens (@Candace Owens) 1647894320

Twitter fans and critics were quick to respond:

Nobody obliterates the @NYTimes as well as the @NYTimes.
— JD Rucker (@JD Rucker) 1647926370
this is gold
— BrianArmstrongisaBaldThievingScumbag (@BrianArmstrongisaBaldThievingScumbag) 1647894406


This\u2026 Ukraine and other ex Soviet countries, including Russia, have some of the worst rankings on that index. It\u2019s well deserved. I don\u2019t know why it\u2019s suddenly controversial to state that corruption is a problem in Ukraine. It doesn\u2019t mean they deserve to be invaded.
— Christina Pushaw \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Christina Pushaw \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1647953668


You're smarter than them and backed by a better more loyal team. Keep it up Candace.
— Chris Lyons (@Chris Lyons) 1647909996


pic.twitter.com/rjhemHfgcO
— Ken (@Ken) 1647911691


Hit them with the truth, perfect!
— Jody Fincher (@Jody Fincher) 1647894515


Why is @nytimes consulting Candace Owens over a piece on #Ukraine?
— Emoluments Clause (@Emoluments Clause) 1647894666


pic.twitter.com/iqiqYeixMl
— David Hockley (@David Hockley) 1647899710


Oh how the Western media narrative has changed from 5 months ago.\n\n\u2018#Ukraine President Zelensky rode to power on pledges to clean up corruption, but Pandora Papers show he &his close circle as multi-million beneficiaries of network of offshore companies\u2019https://www.occrp.org/en/the-pandora-papers/pandora-papers-reveal-offshore-holdings-of-ukrainian-president-and-his-inner-circle\u00a0\u2026
— Peter Cronau (@Peter Cronau) 1647927882

Candace has been under fire recently for her outspoken criticism of Ukrainian President Zelenskyy and for calling out corruption in Ukraine.



Candace Owens: \u201cUkraine wasn't a thing until 1989. Ukraine was created by the Russians\u201d\nhttps://www.mediamatters.org/candace-owens/candace-owens-ukraine-wasnt-thing-until-1989-ukraine-was-created-russians\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/dQ0bfLUvnX
— Jason Campbell (@Jason Campbell) 1647440031

Amid Russian invasion of Ukraine, Peter Schiff suggests that while 'times are hard,' Ukrainian President Zelenskyy should have worn a suit while addressing the US Congress



Peter Schiff faced significant backlash Wednesday on Twitter for posting a tweet suggesting that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who delivered an address to the U.S. Congress on Wednesday, should have worn a suit instead of a t-shirt.

"I understand times are hard, but doesn't the President of the #Ukraine own a suit? I don't have much respect for current members of the U.S. Congress either, but I still wouldn't address them wearing a t-shirt. I wouldn't want to disrespect the institution or the Unites States," wrote Schiff, an economic and financial pundit who hosts "The Peter Schiff Show" podcast. Schiff is the chief economist and global strategist of Euro Pacific Capital.

I understand times are hard, but doesn't the President of the #Ukraine own a suit? I don't have much respect for current members of the U.S. Congress either, but I still wouldn't address them wearing a t-shirt. I wouldn't want to disrespect the institution or the Unites States.
— Peter Schiff (@Peter Schiff) 1647436236

Zelenskyy's address, and Schiff's comment about the man's attire, came as Russia continues to brutally bombard Ukraine, killing many, including civilians.

Schiff, who faced heavy pushback on social media, defended his comments.

"Peter, I agree with you on countless issues, but the guy is in the midst of war....I think it’s understandable and acceptable. Few in our congress would go to the frontlines of war...." one person tweeted.

"If he was speaking live from a foxhole I would agree. But this was a planned historic event. He was not under fire. It makes no sense that he could not have dressed in something more formal than a t-shirt," Schiff replied.

"Dude, not only is he in a war-zone, where I'm sure it's hard to get a suit press and dry clean, but even if it was possible, it's favorable for people to see him as one of them sharing the struggle," someone else commented.

Schiff replied, "He would not have had to press a suit. I'm sure he had a clean suit hanging in the same closet as his t-shirts. Plus even if there were not suits available, maybe a long-sleeved shirt with a collar."

He would not have had to press a suit. I'm sure he had a clean suit hanging in the same closet as his t-shirts. Plus even if there were not suits available, maybe a long-sleeved shirt with a collar.
— Peter Schiff (@Peter Schiff) 1647438354

GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger responded to Schiff's suggestion that the Ukrainian leader should have stepped up his attire for the speech: "I'm ok with it man. You know, war and all," Kinzinger tweeted.

"Imagine not just thinking this, but sending it out into the universe. What an ass. 'Times are hard' is the takeaway when Ukrainian lives are being destroyed simply for wanting to exist without intrusion? Talk about privilege. Here’s an example," Kimberly Ross tweeted.

"It's only March, but you, sir, have just posted the dumbest thing I'll see on Twitter all year," someone else declared.

"Then you don't spend much time on Twitter," Schiff responded.

Then you don't spend much time on Twitter.
— Peter Schiff (@Peter Schiff) 1647439817

Horowitz: Sen. Johnson calls out the FDA for not approving promising late-stage COVID drug



Novel gene therapies and therapeutics were approved, marketed, distributed, funded, and in some cases mandated by the government based on nothing more than data by the manufacturers themselves. Yet, to this day, not a single “Right to Try” has been approved even for drugs that are proven safe. This is true of dozens of treatment ideas for early treatment, but is even more poignant for late-stage COVID, where few ideas seem to work when the vicious cytokine storm causing severe lung inflammation sets in. One drug you never heard of is ZYESAMI (off-patent aviptadil), but Sen. Johnson believes people dying of COVID need at least one option.

In a recent letter co-authored by Sen. Ted Cruz and Reps. Andy Biggs and Chip Roy, Sen. Ron Johnson demands answers from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as to why they have refused to even entertain the emergency use authorization request or even review the data from ZYESAMI manufacturer NRxPharmaceuticals on its efficacy against COVID. Like ivermectin, fluvoxamine, hydroxychloroquine, methylprednisolone, and numerous other drugs tried for COVID, ZYESAMI has an established safety profile and is off patent. Unlike any of the other drugs, though, it has never been fully approved by the FDA. Thus, obviously it’s not going to be a candidate for outpatient treatment. However, it is the only drug that does seem to have some promise for acute stages of cytokine storms because it has been used around the world since the 1970s for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), COPD, and asthma.

Aviptadil was awarded “orphan drug designation” in 2001 by the FDA for the treatment of ARDS, for pulmonary arterial hypertension in 2005, and for pulmonary sarcoidosis in 2021. Orphan drug designation is granted for products that are intended to treat life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions affecting less than 200,000 patients.

Sen. Johnson wants to know why the FDA refuses to look at this late-stage drug that already has approval for pulmonary inflammatory disorders when we still have no other options other than the failed remdesivir, which is dangerous and ineffective. Sen. Johnson spoke to a physician who used this drug on 20 patients, and this is what he reported:

According to the physician, more than 20 patients suffering respiratory failure from COVID-19 received ZYESAMI as authorized under Right to Try. It is our understanding the patients received ZYESAMI after prior administration of remdesivir did not improve the patients’ conditions. All the patients were at the very end stage of COVID and were not expected to recover. Upon receiving ZYESAMI, no serious adverse events associated with use were reported and 16 of the 20 patients left the hospital. According to the physician, patients with ARDS normally have a 40 percent mortality rate. With ZYESAMI, the mortality rate decreased to roughly 10 percent.

Well, if the FDA was unwilling to authorize approval of the FDA-approved ivermectin, it’s not surprising the agency would drag its feet on an EUA for something that has not been approved for other conditions, especially if it’s off patent and there is not a lot of money to be made.

In an interview with TheBlaze, Dr. Flavio Cadegiani, a Brazilian endocrinologist who has treated 2,400 COVID patients without losing a single one, was very bullish on the mechanism of action of this drug against the virus. “Aviptadil is a drug that mimics vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP), however, with prolonged effects, compared to the endogenous (produced by the body) VIP,” explained the doctor, who has innovated for two years to save lives. “VIP and aviptadil act in a type of lung cell called alveolar type II (AT-2), that, although representing just as few as 5% of the cells in the lungs, are largely responsible for oxygen transfer and inhibition of dysfunctional hyper inflammatory reaction and cytokine storm, through the inhibition of the activity of one of the main triggers of these reactions, called NMDA-induced caspase-3.”

Dr. Cadegiani, who has co-authored numerous studies exploring several other treatments for COVID, notes that “to date, there is no other molecule capable of working at late stage against COVID-19, and at the same not causing immunosuppression.”

He also believes aviptadil blocks the IL-6, the most dangerous cytokine at the center of the pulmonary dysfunction related to COVID-19. “The importance is that IL-6 is the cytokine that is not effectively blocked by glucocorticoids, even in very high doses. Thus, aviptadil/VIP could confer additional protection when we most need and when we have the fewest resources for.”

He went further to suggest that it is downright malpractice for hospitals not to try this drug at late stage, given the absence of alternatives. “Due to the absence of therapeutic alternatives targeting AT-2 and IL-6, and given the already well-established safety profile, its approval goes beyond the attempt-to-try principle, since it is highly plausible and likely that it works. Therefore, instead of an action of attempt-to-try when giving aviptadil, not providing it when patients fail to respond to other therapies can be considered a medical negligence, from a bioethical perspective.”

A study published in India on the pharmacological effects of aviptadil on COVID concluded as follows: “All the evident data, published based on clinical trials, seem to be very fruitful in defining a pharmacological guideline for COVID care. In recent clinical trials, the overall target result is that there is a tremendous improvement in life expectancy, by optimizing oxygenation and surveilling cytokine storm in COVID-19–induced respiratory failure.”

In the letter, Sen. Johnson notes that already almost a year ago – before the entirety of the deadly Delta wave that resulted in hundreds of thousands of American deaths – Dr. Fauci himself touted the promise of ZYESAMI, but has refused to rush any trial the way he did remdesivir and Merck’s and Pfizer’s drugs, which, as pure antivirals, have zero promise beyond the first few days (if even then).

The letter asks a series of questions of the FDA and NIAID requesting they produce documentation of their work on ZYESEMI, along with an explanation of their recommendation on how to treat late-stage COVID if they refuse to approve any options. The letter also provides testimony from three citizens who had loved ones recover almost immediately after using ZYESAMI, including Marylander Michael Tuttle, whose wife was turned around with the drug after being on a ventilator.

Consider the fact that FOIAed documents now reveal that Pfizer knew of 1,223 reported possible fatalities from the shot early on and continued to go through with a process that made their novel therapeutic the most promoted, and then mandated, product in history for people who are not even sick. Yet, for those already on their deathbeds, our government won’t approve and make available drugs with established safe mechanisms of action. And they have stifled or attacked every single early treatment idea, including simple nasal sprays.

In my practice, the use of nasal/oral rinses with dilute povidone iodine or dilute hydrogen peroxide has been the biggest advance for both prevention and as a adjunct to early treatment. Supported by 12 clinical studies of which 3 are high quality RCT's.pic.twitter.com/ldtTyFI8gh
— Peter McCullough, MD MPH (@Peter McCullough, MD MPH) 1646740851

The most salient question we must explore as U.S. COVID deaths approach 1 million is how many lives could have been saved had our government authorized, much less promoted, safe, established drugs from day one with the same alacrity that it promoted novel, unproven, and ultimately failed therapeutics? It’s not just a matter of justice for the past, but prudence for the next iteration of this virus and others coming down the “pipeline.”

Finally, ask yourselves if you trust this same government to make decisions on war, peace, and energy policy that affect our national security and the lifeblood of our economy, if they were willing to do this to our bodies.

'Get politics out of math!': USA Today gets demolished for asking, 'Is math racist?'



USA Today was slammed online for a headline to an article asking if math is racist. The headline caused an eruption of negative reactions on social media, and the legacy media outlet decided to change the headline following the uproar.

Fox News reported the original headline for the paywall-hidden article from USA Today read: "Is math racist? As many students of color struggle with the subject, schools are altering instruction — sometimes amid intense debate."

The article calls for "bolder recommendations to make math more inclusive."

However, after the incendiary headline caused a stir and began trending on Twitter, USA Today changed the headline to read: "Is math education racist? Debate rages over changes to how US teaches the subject."

Peter Boghossian – who has taught philosophy at Portland State University for the past decade – wrote, "No, math is not racist. Major venues like @USATODAY even asking this question is a sign of cultural sickness. Racial disparities can be addressed (in part) by using the best evidence-based pedagogical practices that enable student learning. Please stop suggesting math is racist."

No, math is not racist. Major venues like @USATODAY even asking this question is a sign of cultural sickness. \n\nRacial disparities can be addressed (in part) by using the best evidence-based pedagogical practices that enable student learning. Please stop suggesting math is racistpic.twitter.com/aZHAC9L0rR
— Peter Boghossian (@Peter Boghossian) 1638953531

Eric Weinstein – who received his Ph.D. in Mathematics from Harvard University and who previously served as a visiting research fellow at the Mathematical Institute of Oxford University – reacted by saying, "Q: Is Math Racist? Why do 'students of color struggle with the subject'? A: Congratulations to our first place US Math Olympiad team members Vincent Huang, Colin Tang, Edward Wan, Brandon Wang, Luke Robitaille, and Daniel Zhu. Pictured."

Q: Is Math Racist? Why do \u201cstudents of color struggle with the subject\u201d?\n\nA: Congratulations to our first place US Math Olympiad team members Vincent Huang, Colin Tang, Edward Wan, Brandon Wang, Luke Robitaille, and Daniel Zhu. Pictured.pic.twitter.com/Y5UwABU0Xu
— Eric Weinstein (@Eric Weinstein) 1638954366

Spanish professor and economist Daniel Lacalle asked, "Is this a joke?"

Is this a joke?pic.twitter.com/02DH4I4MrV
— Daniel Lacalle (@Daniel Lacalle) 1639001343

Podcast host Lauren Chen noted, "Unequal outcomes aren't always because of racism. Assuming such is actually a pillar of CRT. Believing that everyone should perform equally, despite the fact that even the same person performs differently on different days, is one of the greatest falsehoods progressives embrace."

Talk show host Kim Iversen said, "The left has become so racist they accuse everyone and everything of being racist including….math."

Republican congressional candidate J.D. Vance said, "Meanwhile, China is building hypersonic missiles and advanced artificial intelligence."

Political commentator Kmele Foster rephrased a quote from President George W. Bush, "The soft PUNISHING bigotry of low expectations."

Washington Times columnist Tim Young responded, "Math isn't racist... but the 'educators' who think it needs to be changed and made easier because some black kids struggle with it... ARE."

Daily Caller reporter Chrissy Clark wrote, "While Chinese students are excelling, our children are being told that '2+2=4' is a form of white supremacy because one right answer is an oppressive tactic. GET POLITICS OUT OF MATH!"

British author Andrew Sullivan proclaimed, "Remember: no CRT in schools. Except in everything."

Political consultant Ryan James Girdusky added, "This is critical race theory."

Journalist Eve Barlow quipped, "'Is math racist?' is not an article on The Onion."

Entrepreneur Daniel Bostic tweeted, "Good morning welcome to America also math is racist."

This isn't the first time that math has been deemed to be racist.

In October 2020, the faculty at Wake Forest University created a class titled "Racist/Anti-Racist Uses of Math & Stats," which will teach students about the many ways that mathematical and statistical models have been employed in racist methods.

Last month, The Post Millennial reported, "California is set to adopt new math teaching principles that are based in critical race theory. These changes, which include deemphasizing calculus and pulling programs for academically gifted students, will 'apply social justice principles to math lessons.'"

The guidelines claimed that mathematics has "developed in a way that has excluded many students."

"Because of these inequities, teachers need to work consciously to counter racialized or gendered ideas about mathematics achievement," the guidelines say.