Kansas sues Pfizer for claiming its vaccine was 'safe and effective'



Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach (R) announced Monday that the Sunflower State is suing Pfizer for "misleading claims it made related to the COVID vaccine."

Kobach noted at a press conference in Topeka that "Pfizer made multiple misleading statements to deceive the public about its vaccine at a time when Americans need the truth."

"Pfizer misled the public that it had a 'safe and effective' COVID-19 vaccine," claims the lawsuit, filed in the District Court of Thomas County, Kansas. "Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was safe even though it knew is COVID-19 vaccine was connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies and deaths. Pfizer concealed this critical safety information from the public."

'Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID-19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth.'

The complaint further alleges the pharma giant:

  • glossed over the waning efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine as well as its ineffectiveness against variants and the absence of evidence it curbed transmission;
  • "used FOIA denial and delay to conceal critical data relating to the safety and effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine";
  • "used an extended study timeline to conceal critical data relating to the safety and effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine";
  • used confidentiality agreements to hide the possible dangers and ineffectiveness of the jab;
  • covered its tracks by destroying the vaccine control group; and
  • engaged in a propaganda campaign wherein it omitted critical data about its vaccine, vilified critics, and mischaracterized its profitable product.

While reportedly making roughly $75 billion from its COVID-19 vaccine sales inside a two-year window — selling $57 billion of COVID products in 2022 alone — the lawsuit claims the company "worked to censor speech on social media that questioned Pfizer's claims about its COVID-19 vaccine."

Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, for instance, claimed that Scott Gottlieb, a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration commissioner who became a senior board member of Pfizer, leaned on Twitter in 2021 in an apparent effort to censor criticism of the vaccine. It appears such pressure may have been successful on numerous occasions.

The complaint accuses Pfizer of multiple violations of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and civil conspiracy.

"Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID-19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth about its vaccine's safety risks, waning effectiveness, and inability to prevent transmission," added the lawsuit.

Pfizer, which has produced over 366 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine, told The Hill the case has "no merit."

"We are proud to have developed the COVID-19 vaccine in record time in the midst of a global pandemic and saved countless lives. The representations made by Pfizer about its COVID-19 vaccine have been accurate and science-based," said the company.

The lawsuit comes several months after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a similar lawsuit, claiming, "Pfizer intentionally misrepresented the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine and censored persons who threatened to disseminate the truth in order to facilitate fast adoption of the product and expand its commercial opportunity."

The Texas lawsuit moved to a federal court in January.

Kansas' legal action also follows numerous medical admissions and scientific studies confirming the vaccines were not as advertised, as well as a class-action lawsuit against another COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer in Britain over injuries and deaths.

Blaze News previously reported that a peer-reviewed multinational study examining data from nearly 100 million people not only affirmed the well-documented link between the COVID-19 vaccines and increased risk of heart conditions but has also highlighted troubling links between the AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines and medical conditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain and spinal cord inflammation, Bell's palsy, and convulsions.

The study, published in the esteemed journal Vaccine, also noted there were "significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses" of Pfizer's BNT162b2 vaccine.

Another peer-reviewed study published Jan. 24 in the Springer Nature Group journal Cureus suggested the COVID-19 vaccines were a rushed product with an "unacceptable harm-to-reward ratio."

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

Chris Cuomo says he's now regularly taking ivermectin after unapologetically shaming those who said it worked



Disgraced former CNN talking head Chris Cuomo recently revealed that the very life-saving drug he helped smear during the pandemic now courses through his veins.

Background

Ivermectin, an inexpensive anti-parasitic drug with anti-inflammatory properties, was approved for use in humans in 1987 and has since been one of the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States. For discovering some of the ways it could be used to save human lives and stave off blindness, William C. Campbell and Satoshi Omura were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2015.

"[If] ivermectin is what those of us who have looked at the evidence think it is ... the debate about the vaccines would be over by definition," said Bret Weinstein.

This life-saving and prize-worthy generic medicine underwent a sudden rebrand during the pandemic after various scientists and doctors realized it could be used as a cheap and effective way to treat COVID-19 infections. Among the various indications that the drug worked was a June 2020 study in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Antiviral Research, which showed that ivermectin inhibited the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures.

Evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein told Tucker Carlson in July 2021, "[If] ivermectin is what those of us who have looked at the evidence think it is ... the debate about the vaccines would be over by definition."

The mainstream media, the Food and Drug Administration, and various so-called experts — all apparently captive to the idea that the only way to treat COVID-19 was with expensive, novel vaccines produced by the pharmaceutical giants that routinely advertise on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC — smeared the drug and those who dared prescribe it, suggesting that ivermectin was nothing more than a poisonous "horse de-worming drug."

Months into this campaign, the FDA warned in March 2021 that taking the drug could "cause serious harm," then in August leaned into the horse de-wormer smear, tweeting, "You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Serious y'all. Stop It."

The FDA was later sued over its misleading claims and ultimately settled in March. Per the terms of the settlement, the agency agreed to remove its anti-ivermectin propaganda from social media. However, the damage was already done.

Daniel Horowitz, the host of "Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz" on the Blaze Podcast Network and author of "Rise of the Fourth Reich: Confronting COVID Fascism with a New Nuremberg Trial So This Never Happens Again," told Blaze News, "Words cannot fully capture the degree of human suffering from the war on alternative treatments at a time when the medical establishment had zero answers for patients — including those already vaccinated — with blood oxygen levels dropping. The war on ivermectin and similar drugs was so demonic that they would find every way possible to deny prescriptions and then filling them even at the pharmacies."

"It was so bad that doctors would tell families their patients were as good as dead, and that it was now time to pull the plug, but [would] still go to court to block their ability to use ivermectin as a last try," continued Horowitz. "I'm still haunted by nightmares of hundreds of sick people reaching out to me, desperate for treatment and access to the heroic doctors I was privileged to know."

Cuomo climbs aboard the bandwagon

Around the time the anti-ivermectin campaign was ramping up, Chris Cuomo still had a job at CNN, having not yet been canned over his role in disgraced former Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo's sex scandal. Cuomo willingly partook in the horse de-wormer smear.

In one instance, Cuomo joined Don Lemon — who CNN later also ended up firing — in blasting people who considered taking ivermectin.

"People are getting, injecting drugs for animals and horses — oh my God," said Don Lemon.

"And people telling them to," Cuomo chimed in. "What person — you know you talk about like cancel culture and who to shame. Ivermectin. A de-wormer. Really? ... They need to be called out and shamed, brother."

— (@)

'Nauseating' about-face

Cuomo, now with NewsNation, recently appeared on Patrick Bet-David's podcast where he was lightly grilled over his pandemic-era punditry. Bet-David showed Cuomo a viral video of a July 2021 CNN segment in which he berated Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) for refusing to take or push the COVID-19 experimental vaccine on the American public.

Bet-David asked Cuomo, "What's changed from that conversation with you and Byron to where you are today?"

"Well, a lot has changed and a lot needs to change that hasn't," replied Cuomo, adding he would not apologize.

"It was never personal. I believe as a leader, at that time, you had a duty to be thorough in what you were putting out there as opposed to just playing politics, ok. This was never as simple as vaccine good, vaccine bad. Politics made it that," said Cuomo, who is suffering from long-term health effects he resists attributing to the vaccines. "And it put us in a toxic environment."

"Do I now believe that we have data to support the fact that there are thousands of people who have adverse effects, that are not getting attention let alone treatment? Yes, and I fault government for that," continued Cuomo. "I do not fault myself for telling people at the time what the government was giving us as best practices."

Deeper into the podcast, Cuomo made a major admission.

"I'll tell you something else that's going to get you a lot of hits. I am taking a ... regular dose, you know whatever, of ivermectin. Ivermectin was a boogeyman early on in COVID," said Cuomo. "That was wrong. We were given bad information about ivermectin. The real question is, 'Why?'"

"Everyone is going to say, 'Joe Rogan was right.' No, Joe Rogan was saying — yeah, we was right, but that's not what matters. What matters is the entire clinical community knew that ivermectin couldn't hurt you. They knew it, Patrick. I know they knew it. How do I know it?" continued the former CNN host. "Because now I am doing nothing but talking to these clinicians who at the time were overwhelmed by COVID, and they weren't saying anything, not that they were hiding anything. But it's cheap, it's not owned by anybody, and it's used as anti-microbial, anti-viral in all these different ways and has been for a long time."

"My doctor ... was using it during COVID on her family and on her patients and it was working for them," added Cuomo. "So, they were wrong to play scared on that. Didn't know that at the time. Know it now. Admit it now. Reporting on it now."

Horowitz told Blaze News, "For Cuomo to suddenly acknowledge he knew all along ivermectin worked while joining the COVID genocide bandwagon when it was actually needed is nauseating."

\ud83d\udc40 Chris Cuomo Says He Does Not Apologize for Shaming People Who Didn't Take the Vaccine, Reveals He Is Taking Ivermectin Now \n\n"My doctors say I have 'Long COVID'. I have the symptoms, they showed me my blood work. It scared the bejesus out of me to see this glowing micro-clot\u2026
— (@)

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

AstraZeneca is withdrawing its vaccine globally after admitting it can cause potentially deadly blood clots



British-Swedish pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca is taking its COVID-19 vaccine off the market worldwide.

While the move follows hard on the heels of the company's admission that its shot can cause potentially deadly blood clots and in the face of a class-action lawsuit brought by apparent victims and deceased victims' families, AstraZeneca has attributed the withdrawal to commercial considerations.

Background

The Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was a viral-vector vaccine developed in collaboration with Oxford University and produced for various companies by the Serum Institute of India. It relied upon a modified version of a chimpanzee adenovirus and was sold under various brand names, including Vaxzevria and Covishield.

Blaze News previously reported that the shot was approved for use in the U.K. in December 2020 and later approved by the World Health Organization. While never approved for rollout in the U.S., the Biden administration agreed to share up to 60 million doses with other nations.

Within a year of approval, the vaccine had been injected over 2.5 billion times worldwide.

The vaccine was not only touted by then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson as a "triumph for British science" but passed off as "safe and effective" by the mainstream media and various so-called experts on both sides of the Atlantic.

Some unfortunate members of the British public and others around the world similarly cajoled into getting the vaccine were soon left with a firsthand understanding that the so-called experts were dead wrong.

Doctors started noticing in 2021 that otherwise healthy people were ending up with grievous injuries or even dying after receiving the AstaZeneca shot. Facing mounting evidence of a link between the vaccine and adverse side effects, various countries temporarily took the shot off the market, citing reports of abnormal bleeding, low blood platelets, blood clots, and sudden deaths.

German and Nordic researchers determined that some vaccine recipients were developing a clotting disorder called "vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia," which generated antibodies that activated platelets and led to clots. Researchers indicated that the odds of the vaccine harming recipients was one in 100,000 — a higher likelihood than the vaccine actually keeping patients under 30 out of the hospital with COVID.

The Telegraph reported that among the hundreds of suspected thrombo-embolic events documented among British AstraZeneca patients, at least seven were ultimately fatal for victims in the 18-29 age cohort; 10 were fatal for victims ages 30-39; 17 were fatal for victims ages 40-49; 21 were fatal for victims ages 50-59; 11 were fatal for victims ages 60-69; seven were fatal for victims ages 70-79; and four were fatal for those 80 and over.

Legal action and admission

Jamie Scott, a father of two who was left with a permanent clot-related brain injury following his AstraZeneca vaccination in April 2021, sued the company last year. His effort to hold the pharmaceutical giant accountable set off an avalanche of similar complaints.

In the months since, over 50 other alleged vaccine victims have joined a class-action lawsuit against the company.

The Telegraph reported that the company told Scott's lawyers last year it did "not accept that [thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome] is caused by the vaccine at a generic level."

However, AstraZeneca admitted in a February court document that "it is admitted that the AZ vaccine can, in very rare cases, cause TTS. The causal mechanism is not known."

According to the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, "very rare" side effects are those that occur in less than one in 10,000 cases, reported the Independent.

This admission was a big deal granted the company had repeatedly denied causation over the years.

For instance, in a March 14, 2021, statement, AstraZeneca claimed that a careful review showed "no evidence of an increased risk of pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or thrombocytopenia, in any defined age group, gender, batch or in any particular country."

Withdrawal

According to the Telegraph, AstraZeneca voluntarily withdrew its "marketing authorization" in the European Union on March 5, just weeks after filing court documents containing its blood-clot admission. This withdrawal application went into effect on Tuesday.

"This decision to withdraw marketing authorization, ending the usage of the AstraZeneca vaccine in the EU, will be welcomed," said a lawyer for the alleged victims of the vaccine, now engaged in a class-action lawsuit against the company.

The company, which did over $12 billion in product sales in Q1 2024, is expected to follow suit in other markets around the globe where its vaccine was approved.

The reason provided for the withdrawal is that the vaccine has been made redundant by other "updated vaccines."

AstraZeneca reportedly said in a statement, "We are incredibly proud of the role Vaxzevria played in ending the global pandemic. According to independent estimates, over 6.5 million lives were saved in the first year of use alone and over three billion doses were supplied globally."

"Our efforts have been recognized by governments around the world and are widely regarded as being a critical component of ending the global pandemic," continued the statement. "As multiple, variant Covid-19 vaccines have since been developed, there is a surplus of available updated vaccines. This has led to a decline in demand for Vaxzevria, which is no longer being manufactured or supplied. AstraZeneca has therefore taken the decision to initiate withdrawal of the marketing authorizations for Vaxzevria within Europe."

"We will now work with regulators and our partners to align on a clear path forward to conclude this chapter and significant contribution to the Covid-19 pandemic," added the company.

Sarah Moore, a partner with the law firm representing the group action, told the Telegraph, "To those who we represent, all of whom have suffered bereavement or serious injury as a result of the AstraZeneca vaccine, this decision to withdraw marketing authorization, ending the usage of the AstraZeneca vaccine in the EU, will be welcomed."

Moore suggested further that the withdrawal will be viewed as a "decision linked with AstraZeneca's recent admission that the vaccine can cause TTS, and the fact that regulators across the world suspended or stopped usage of the vaccine following concerns regarding TTS."

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

Tennessee passes law stating any food with vaccine material must be classified as a drug



Tennessee passed a bill with a large majority that would force any food that includes vaccines or vaccine-related materials to be classified as a drug.

The topic of edible vaccines has been talked about for years since the COVID-19 vaccine faced pushback, but the Tennessee legislature has sought to ensure that no ingestible pharmaceuticals slide under the radar.

HB 1894 defines food that contains a vaccine or vaccine material as a drug under the Tennessee Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

A vaccine or vaccine-material was described by the state as:

"A substance intended for use in humans to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against disease, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease, that is authorized or approved by the United States food and drug administration."

The state House passed the bill by a whopping 73-22, while the state Senate passed the bill with a vote of 24-6.

Democrat state Sen. Heidi Campbell, who voted "no" in the Senate, called the passing of the legislation "messy" and called its need into question. Campbell asked for evidence of "any instances of there being food offered in the state of Tennessee that contains vaccines."

Supporting Senate members said that they did not have any specific examples but that the bill was meant to ensure regulations were in place.

Campbell also claimed that the "idea that this would somehow correlate to some kind of a retail offering of vegetables, especially when that vegetable would cost many thousands of dollars, just seems to me [to be] messy to be passing legislation for that reason."

However, there have been several instances of studies that have researched how to include COVID-19 vaccines or mRNA technology in vegetables. MSN cited a research project from the University of California that was funded by a $500,000 federal grant. The study's purpose was to determine whether mRNA technology could be implanted into the cells of edible plants to replicate and then be consumed.

Congratulations Tennessee on leading the way towards stopping the genetic poisoning of our food. MRNA has no place in the food supply and neither do many of the other poisons being put on our foods. Thank you Tennessee and note let\u2019s put pressure to do even more in other states!\u2026
— (@)

In early 2024, researchers from Japan, India, and other countries published a study regarding tomato-made edible COVID-19 vaccines.

The study claimed that plant-based edible vaccines provided two-layer protection against "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2)" and performed better than vaccines that are absorbed outside the digestive tract. These "predominantly cause a systemic immune response," the study said.

The bill now moves to Republican Gov. Bill Lee's desk for final approval.

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

Blood clots, neurological disorders, and swollen hearts: Multinational study on COVID vaccines paints a damning picture



Those skeptical of the assertion that COVID-19 vaccines were altogether safe and effective — a claim long advanced by once-trusted government agencies, pharmaceutical companies, and the media amidst a historic censorship campaign targeting dissenters and critics — appear to have had their doubts once again validated.

A damning new peer-reviewed multinational study examining data from nearly 100 million people has not only affirmed the well-documented link between the COVID-19 vaccines and increased risk of heart conditions but has also highlighted troubling links between the AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines and medical conditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain and spinal cord inflammation, Bell's palsy, and convulsions.

The study was conducted by the Global COVID Vaccine Safety Project — a Global Vaccine Data Network initiative supported by both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services — and published last week in the esteemed journal Vaccine, the official journal of the Japanese Society for Vaccinology.

Lead author Kristýna Faksová of the Department of Epidemiology Research at the Danish State's Serum Institute was joined by researchers from various other countries including Argentina, Australia, Canada, Finland, New Zealand, and Scotland in assessing whether there was a greater risk of 13 neurological, blood, and heart-related medical conditions occurring following the receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine.

According to the observed versus expected rates study, which included data on 99 million people vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 across eight countries, "the risk up to 42 days after vaccination was generally similar to the background risk for the majority of outcomes; however, a few potential safety signals were identified."

"Bell's palsy had an increased OE ratio after a first dose of [Pfizer's] BNT162b2 and [Moderna's] mRNA-1273," said the study. "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."

The researchers observed a trend of Guillain-Barré syndrome and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis — a type of blood clot in the brain — cases after viral vector vaccines such as the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which Canada and European nations ditched in spring 2021 over reports of dangerous blood clots.

The researchers specifically found a "statistically significant increase in GBS cases within 42 days after a first ChAdOx1 dose." Whereas they expected to find 76 GBS "events," they found well over twice as many.

The University of Auckland, which hosts the Global Vaccine Data Network, noted that the researchers found possible "safety signals for transverse myelitis (inflammation of part of the spinal cord) after viral vector vaccines and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (inflammation and swelling in the brain and spinal cord) after viral vector and mRNA vaccines."

However, the paper cautioned that "although some case reports have suggested a possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and ADEM, there was no consistent pattern in terms of vaccine or timing following vaccination, and larger epidemiological studies have not confirmed any potential association."

The study did however confirm previously established safety signals for myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA vaccination, highlighting "significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 as well as pericarditis after the first and fourth dose of mRNA-1273, and third dose of ChAdOx1, in the 0–42 days risk period."

According to the study, "Potential underreporting across countries may have led to an underestimation of the significance of potential safety signals" for viral vector and mRNA vaccines alike.

"The size of the population in this study increased the possibility of identifying rare potential vaccine safety signals," Faksová said in a statement. "Single sites or regions are unlikely to have a large enough population to detect very rare signals."

The researchers claimed that the "safety signals identified in this study should be evaluated in the context of their rarity, severity, and clinical relevance."

Additionally, they noted the "overall risk–benefit evaluations of vaccination should take the risk associated with infection into account, as multiple studies demonstrated higher risk of developing the events under study, such as GBS, myocarditis, or ADEM, following SARS-CoV-2 infection than vaccination."

Blaze News reported earlier this month that a peer-reviewed study published Jan. 24 in the Springer Nature Group journal Cureus suggested the COVID-19 vaccines were a rushed product with an "unacceptable harm-to-reward ratio."

The study noted that the kinds of serious adverse events that would be factored into a risk-benefit comparison "have often been wrongly ascribed to COVID-19 rather than to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations."

"Misattributions of SAEs to COVID-19 often may be due to the amplification of adverse effects when mRNA injections are followed by SARS-CoV-2 subvariant infection," said the study. "Injuries from the mRNA products overlap with both [post-acute COVID-19 syndrome] and severe acute COVID-19 illness, often obscuring the vaccines' etiologic contributions."

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

How Democrats’ Prescription Price Controls Are Making Americans Sick

The 60,000 patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer over the next three years could be out of luck for a treatment, thanks to Biden and congressional Democrats.

Transvestite who wants puberty blockers as 'default option' for kids joins other radicals on WHO task force



The World Health Organization, a specialized agency of the U.N. still regarded by some to be an authority on health matters, has assembled a task force to develop "a guideline on the health of trans and gender diverse people."

Critics have blasted the WHO over this guideline development group, not only because it presumes at the outset that gender dysphoria must be entertained and that genital mutilation qualifies as "care," but because of the radical activists it comprises.

One member in particular has prompted serious doubt over the value and seriousness of whatever recommendations the group might ultimately make: a French-Canadian man who calls himself Florence Ashley and describes himself as a "transfeminine activist, academic, and slut."

The WHO, which has gone back to receiving hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars a year under President Joe Biden, announced on Dec. 18 that Ashley would be among the 21 appointees, predominantly transvestites and LGBT activists, who will meet in February to work on a guideline.

The guideline they are to work on will supposedly tackle the "provision of gender-affirming care, including hormones; health workers education and training for the provision of gender-inclusive care; ... health policies that support gender-inclusive care, and legal recognition of self-determined gender identity."

Ashley, an assistant professor at the University of Alberta Faculty of Law in Canada, has already made clear where he stands on these issues.

The radical transvestite claimed in a 2019 paper published in Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry that "Unbounded social transition and ready access to puberty blockers ought to be treated as the default option, and support should be offered to parents who may have difficulty accepting their youth."

He claimed in an article for the leftist blog Truthout that efforts to protect children from irreversible puberty blockers, genital mutilations, and LGBT propaganda are "rooted in racism and white supremacy."

Reduxx reported that Ashley has also called for destructive puberty blocker drugs to be mandated as a go-to "gender creative youth."

"Although taking puberty blockers is a form of medical treatment, it certainly facilitates exploration significantly more than letting puberty run its course; whereas puberty strongly favours cis embodiment by raising the psychological and medical toll of transitioning, puberty blockers structurally place transgender and cisgender hormonal futures in approximate symmetry," Ashley wrote. "Youth who take puberty blockers have their options wide open, their bodies unaltered by either testosterone or oestrogen."

Extra to championing irreversible, sterilizing medications for confused children, Ashley has called for parents "who have difficulty accepting their child's gender identity and transition" to be subjected to re-education to resolve their "parental hostility and rejection of their trans child."

The WHO appointee also argued in the Dalhousie Law Journal for the decriminalization of rape by fraud, specifically in cases where a transvestite has sex with a victim without indicating he isn't actually a woman as advertised. "To turn f***ing into a crime because the person's gender challenges the sexual identity of their consenting partners is an attempt to further entrench a cisheteronormative social order," wrote Ashley.

Ashley himself has contemplated committing sexual assault by fraud, writing, "I can’t wait to have sex with a cishet guy and ask him: 'Oh babe, how does it feel f***ing a penis with your penis?'"

The Post Millennial's Libby Emmons further highlighted that Ashley has argued against requirements that prospective victims undergo mental health assessments before receiving sex-change surgeries or taking hormone therapies.

— (@)

Leor Sapir, a political scientist and fellow at the Manhattan Institute, wrote, "I've been asked how it's possible that a reputable institution like @WHO can appoint as an expert to a clinical guideline panel an activist lawyer who demands that others use 'that b****' as a pronoun. And yet that's exactly what WHO has done."

— (@)

Reem Alsalem, the U.N. special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, lashed out at WHO, claiming it was taking a "one-sided," pro-medicalization approach to so-called "trans healthcare," reported the Guardian.

Alsalem wrote to WHO's director general that the task force contained "significant unmanaged conflicts of interest."

"Stakeholders whose views differ from those held by transgender activist organisations do not appear to have been invited," wrote the feminist special rapporteur. "Such stakeholders include experts from European public health authorities who have taken the lead on developing an evidence-based and consequently cautious approach to youth gender transitions (eg England, Sweden and Finland)."

The WHO task force also includes former presidents of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, an American lobby group that Reduxx indicated has "multiple ties to academics involved in either pro-pedophilia activism or pedophilia apologism."

WPATH's latest "Standards of Care," reportedly developed in collaboration with the Eunuch Archive, a castration fetish forum that hosts erotica concerning the castration of children and other grotesque acts, calls for no age limits on sex changes for minors, reported the College Fix.

Most appointees, including Ashley, suffered "strong, one-sided views in favour of promoting hormonal gender transition and legal recognition of self-asserted gender," Alsalem continued in her letter to the head of the WHO. "Not one appears to represent a voice of caution for medicalising youth with gender dysphoria or the protection of female-only spaces."

The Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender, a large group of clinicians in the U.K. and Ireland, recently raised the question of why the WHO task force figured mutilations and chemical treatments were necessarily the best way forward.

"There are no robust randomised-controlled trials supporting gender-affirming medical and surgical interventions, and therefore there are no studies which tell us about the efficacy of these interventions, in children or adults," the group said in a Jan. 4 statement.

The CANSG also noted that allowing transvestites to claim access to the rights of the opposite sex has "harmful public health consequences," including on "women in prisons, in hospitals, in care, in mental health settings, women accessing services following domestic or sexual violence, and those that are dependent on other people for intimate care."

"WHO is trusted the world over to produce reliable guidelines that take a human rights approach to promoting health equity. Given the rising controversy in this field, it would appear that WHO is out of touch with developments globally. We urge WHO to pause this guideline and rethink its approach," added CANSG.

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

Doctors Ignore Existing Postpartum Depression Treatment In Favor Of Pricey Synthetic Drugs

Traditional American health care lacks high-quality preventive care for women, especially around fertility, pregnancy, and postpartum.

Pharma Lawsuit Shows The Extent Of Biden’s Health Care Stranglehold

Merck calls 'negotiation' provisions in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act 'unconstitutional,' but there may be no way out.

RFK Jr. tells Musk he wants to permanently seal the US-Mexico border; links mass shootings to pharmaceutical drugs



Robert F. Kennedy Jr. joined Elon Musk, venture capitalist David Sacks, former Democratic lawmaker Tulsi Gabbard, and others for a Twitter Spaces interview Monday to discuss many of the issues he reckons should be at the forefront of the political debate going into the 2024 presidential election.

Kennedy, running for president as a Democrat, drew the ire of the liberal media for championing so-called "right-wing ideas and misinformation" during the interview, which had more than 64,000 active listeners during the live broadcast and over 1.8 million listeners tune in since.

The New York Times, in particular, took issue with Kennedy's: expressed desire to close the U.S.-Mexico border; suggestion that there is a link between mass shootings and pharmaceutical drugs; claim that COVID-19 was "clearly a bioweapon"; and his criticism of Democrats' penchant for for war.

Guns, drugs, and Big Pharma

Kennedy clarified that he is a "constitutional absolutist."

The 69-year-old son of assassinated former U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of assassinated former President John F. Kennedy stressed he knows firsthand the impact of gun violence but noted that the Supreme Court has made clear the meaning of the Second Amendment, which he would not impinge on.

Extra to acknowledging gun culture is deeply integrated in rural communities around the nation and that taking away Americans' guns is "not the right thing," Kennedy noted that further infringements on the Second Amendment would be rightly recognized as "part of a systematic assault on our Bill of Rights" at a time "when the Constitution has been under attack ... in an unprecedented way."

While supportive of security-hardening measures at schools as a temporary means to stymie future school shootings, Kennedy indicated that the real solution requires an understanding of the real problem, which isn't guns. After all, other countries with comparable numbers of guns per capita go without routine mass murders.

"[In] Switzerland, the last school shooting was 21 years ago. We have one every 21 hours. The one thing that we have that is different than anybody in the world is the amount of psychiatric drugs that our children are taking and our people are taking," said Kennedy.

As president, Kennedy said he would "look very closely at the role of psychiatric drugs in these events — and there are no good studies right now that should have been done years ago on this issue — because there is tremendous circumstantial evidence that those SSRIs and benzos and other drugs are doing this."

"There's something happening in our country right now that is not happening anywhere else in the world and has never happened in human history," continued Kennedy. "You have to look at some of the — almost all of these — drugs. If you look at their manufacturers' inserts, they include a side effect of homicidal and suicidal behavior. ... Prior to the introduction of Prozac, we had almost none of these events in our country and we've never seen them in human history."

\u201cRobert F Kennedy Jr\u2019s full position on The Second Amendment in his own words:\n-RFK Jr commits to not taking anyone\u2019s guns.\n-RFK Jr commits to funding studies on antidepressants and antipsychotics as they pertain to school shootings.\u201d
— The Redheaded libertarian (@The Redheaded libertarian) 1685996865

Closing the border

Kennedy minced no words on the subject of American sovereignty with particular concern to the U.S.-Mexico border.

"We need to seal our border," said Kennedy. "It is a key existential function for every nation in the world to be able to control immigration at its border and having millions of people or hundreds of thousands, in this case millions of people, flowing across the border is not something any nation can or should put up with."

"Worst of all, it's created a humanitarian crisis at the border. The notion that we have an open border is now a gospel around the world so that people are flying in from all over the world, from Europe, from China, from Asia ... and being assisted by nonprofit groups and by government groups to actually make their way to the United States border within buses, and that needs to be shut down."

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, over 1.4 million illegal aliens stole into the country between October and April alone. Between October 2021 and September 2022, the number of southwest land border encounters was well over 2.3 million. Another 1.7 million entered illegally between October 2020 and September 2021.

Kennedy credits some of the illegal migration to bad U.S. foreign policy in South and Central America, invoking the fallout of the war on drugs and past U.S.-backed coups.

Beyond re-evaluating the country's approach to its involvement with southern nations, he stressed, "Above all, we need to seal the border," especially since illegal immigration has a profound impact on the American poor.

"We have people in this country who are poverty-stricken and who don't have access, because of the paucity of public assistance, don't even have access to public assistance. And we need to be protecting the people in this country," said Kennedy. "We don't have the capacity to support a lot of new immigrants. This huge flood of new immigrants that's coming into our cities and stressing the school systems, stressing the social service systems for ... Americans who are already struggling. It needs to be turned off."

\u201cJUST IN \u2013 Robert F. Kennedy Jr Announces He Is Going to Mexico Tonight to Create a Plan to End the Border Crisis\n\n"I'm actually going to the border tonight. I'm crossing the border around 3am into Mexico. And I'll be talking with people on both sides of the border and talking to\u2026\u201d
— Chief Nerd (@Chief Nerd) 1685993536

Bioweapons and military adventurism

Kennedy said that the Democratic Party was not only captive to the pharmaceutical industry but that it has a great interest in the business of war, underscoring that President Joe Biden is a warmonger, reported the Times.

"I think the Democratic Party became the party of war," said Kennedy. "I attribute that directly to President Biden. ... He has always been in favor of very bellicose, pugnacious and aggressive foreign policy, and he believes that violence is a legitimate political tool for achieving America’s objectives abroad."

Kennedy was as critical if not more so of the war allegedly waged on the homeland.

Kennedy claimed that the CIA continued developing bioweapons in secret after the Biological Weapons Convention went into force in 1975, then took production into high gear in concert with other elements of the government after the Patriot Act was passed.

"We should shut the whole thing down. You know COVID was clearly a bioweapons problem and you saw what that did to us. What if it was a real disease? A disease that had a 50% mortality like dengue fever or Ebola or, you know, one of these other real deadly viruses. They got those in the labs too. What if that was the one that escaped? Let's shut it down around the world," said Kennedy.

\u201cRobert Kennedy Jr:\n\n"The CIA continued to secretly develop bioweapons. After 2001, we passed the Patriot Act and launched the bioweapons arms race... We should shut the whole thing down. Covid was clearly a bioweapon."\u201d
— Citizen Free Press (@Citizen Free Press) 1685997139

Liberal media responds

The New York Times claimed Kennedy "sounded like a candidate far more at ease in the mushrooming Republican presidential contest," accusing him of using his "campaign platform — and his famous name — to promote misinformation and ideas that have little traction in his party."

The Times further suggested that Kennedy "is a longtime amplifier and propagator of baseless theories."

CNN suggested that Musk's "direct association with Kennedy ... could have significant ramifications both for Twitter as a platform and for Musk's credibility," writing off Kennedy as a "marginal candidate who espouses debunked medical claims.

While CNN framed the interview in a negative light, it did manage to note some of Kennedy's pro-liberty credentials: "Kennedy has also attacked the closing of churches, social distancing and government track-and-trace surveillance."

Rolling Stone, which has repeatedly issued false reports and libels, summarized the interview thusly: "The environmental lawyer turned conspiracy theorist — now attempting to primary President Biden for the 2024 Democratic presidential nomination — made time to discuss a wide range of his more outlandish and pseudoscientific ideas throughout a conversation that lasted nearly two and a half hours."

The interview can be heard in its entirety here:

\u201cHere's the space. Live now (music)\n\nhttps://t.co/uXPzG4AfQa\u201d
— Steve Kirsch (@Steve Kirsch) 1685988485

According to a late-May CNN poll, Kennedy is second most-favored in the polls amongst prospective Democratic voters. 20% presently favor him, but he trails Biden by 40 points. The RealClear Politics average presently has Biden at 42.5 point advantage.

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