CBS News' medical contributor claims young people suffered unprecedented spike in heart attacks because of a lack of masking and vaccinations



CBS News' medical contributor Celine Gounder insinuated Monday that the young people who suffered an unprecedented spike in lethal heart attacks during the first two years of the pandemic might only have themselves to blame.

While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is among the agencies and experts that have acknowledged a link between the COVID-19 vaccines and heart issues, Gounder suggested that the spike in heart attacks was instead likely resultant of young people with generally stronger immune systems not getting vaccinated and failing to wear masks.

What are the details?

Gounder, editor at large for public health at Kaiser Health News, spoke to CBS News about a recent national study conducted by doctors at Cedars-Sinai Hospital, which showed a spike in heart attacks during the pandemic across all age groups, but in the 25- to 44-year-old age group in particular — a demographic previously not regarded to be at high risk of cardiac arrest.

The study, based on data analysis from the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai and published in the Journal of Medical Virology, found that heart attack death rates "took a sharp turn" and spiked during the pandemic, including during the Omicron phase of the pandemic when mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were ubiquitous.

Dr. Yee Hui Yeo, the first author on the study, said, "The dramatic rise in heart attacks during the pandemic has reversed what was a prior decadelong steady improvement in cardiac deaths."

The researchers recognized that "infections such as the flu can increase risk for heart disease and heart attack," but noted that "the sharp rise in heart attack deaths is like nothing seen before."

The study ultimately showed that there were 143,787 heart attack deaths in the year prior to the onset of the pandemic. However, in 2020, this number increased by 14% to 164,096.

According to Cedars-Sinai, the "excess in acute myocardial infarction-associated mortality has persisted throughout the pandemic, even during the most recent period marked by a surge of the presumed less-virulent Omicron variant."

The relative rise in heart attack deaths was most pronounced in the youngest group. By 2021, "the 'observed' compared to 'predicted' rates of heart attack death had increased by 29.9% for adults ages 25-44, by 19.6% for adults ages 45-64, and by 13.7% for adults age 65 and older."

Cedars-Sinai appeared keen to attribute the spike in heart attacks to multiple factors, including trends that long predated the pandemic, but failed to mention the vaccines. Among the possible reasons given were that COVID-19 may have accelerated preexisting coronary artery disease or that chronic stress resultant of job loss and other financial pressures set them off.

Yeo noted, "There are several potential explanations for the rapid rise in cardiac deaths in patients with COVID-19, yet still many unanswered questions."

Blame game

Gounder joined CBS News' Tony Dokoupil and Lilia Luciano on Monday to discuss the study's findings.

"So the 25- to 44-year-olds — you saw this 30% increase in the risk of death from heart attack. And that really is quite striking," said Gounder. "That's not a group, an age group, in which you normally see heart attacks, much less dying from a heart attack."

Dokoupil said, "You look at the years prior to the pandemic and the typical rate of heart attack death in that age group, and then you see it increase and you wonder, what’s the new variable? And so the pandemic is that the new variable?"

"That's right," answered Gounder, reiterating the researchers' point that in the years leading up to the pandemic, heart attacks were actually on the decline.

When answering why younger people in particular suffered a spike in fatal heart attacks, Gounder admitted that there was no confirmation that many of the deceased had COVID-19 to begin with: "We don't know for sure. And in fact, these death certificates are probably not even capturing the fact that [the victims] had COVID. They're really just saying that you died from a heart attack or not."

"What we do know, however, is that younger people were less likely to protect themselves against COVID than older people, less likely to mask, less likely to take other mitigation measures, and they were also further back in line to get vaccinated. ... Those might have been a factor here," claimed Gounder.

\u201cHeart attack deaths in young adults rose during first two years of COVID-19 pandemic\nSource: CBS News (YouTube)\u201d
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1676409990

Gounder took to Twitter to double down on her speculations, concluding that people should get vaccinated and wear masks to minimize their risk of heart attacks.

\u201c7/ How can you reduce your risk of heart\ud83e\udec0attack from COVID?\n\ud83d\udc89getting vaccinated\n\ud83d\ude37wearing a mask, especially in indoor public spaces during COVID surges\ud83d\udcc8\n\ud83e\ude9fventilation & air filtration\u201d
— C\u00e9line\u00a0Gounder,\u00a0MD, ScM, FIDSA \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6 (@C\u00e9line\u00a0Gounder,\u00a0MD, ScM, FIDSA \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6) 1676414796

A recent study cast doubt on the benefits of one of Gounder's recommendations.

"Interestingly, 12 trials in the review, ten in the community and two among healthcare workers, found that wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to influenza-like or COVID-19-like illness transmission," British epidemiologist Tom Jefferson, co-author of the Cochrane Library's report on masking trials, noted in the Spectator. "Equally, the review found that masks had no effect on laboratory-confirmed influenza or SARS-CoV-2 outcomes. Five other trials showed no difference between one type of mask over another."

The Telegraph reported on another study that found young men were "six times more likely to suffer from heart problems after being jabbed than be hospitalised from coronavirus."

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

'I won't apologize': Justin Trudeau doubles down on calling trucker protesters 'tinfoil hat' conspiracy theorists



During a recent interview with CTV News, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubled down on his remarks regarding the trucker protest of 2022, referring to some of the activists as "tinfoil hat" conspiracy theorists who engage in "disinformation" and "misinformation."

The Canadian leader somewhat walked back his previous remarks, calling the people he referred to a "small minority" group within the "movements" that are spreading "harmful lies."

"Those people, and they were a small minority within the larger 'anti' movements who were really vocal, I don't and I won't apologize for calling out people who were harming their fellow Canadians," Trudeau said.

"So, 'tinfoil hats' comment, you don't regret?" asked CTV's Omar Sachedina.

"When someone believes that your government is trying to inject a vaccine in you to control your mind and track you and there's a microchip in it, that's almost the definition of a government conspiracy theory, that you wear a tinfoil hat to protect your brain from brain waves," Trudeau concluded.

However, this statement by the prime minister differs from his remarks during the onset of the protests, when he referred to the demonstration in its entirety as a "fringe minority."

In January 2022, Trudeau said that the views expressed by "a few people gathered in Ottawa" were a "continuation of what we have unfortunately seen in disinformation and misinformation online – conspiracy theorists about microchips, about God knows what else that go with the tinfoil hats.”

Also remarking that other Canadians were “watching in disgust and disbelief at [the] behavior" of the protest, "wondering how this could have happened in our nation’s capital."

At the time, Trudeau also pointed toward "Nazi symbolism, racist imagery, and desecration of war memorials" at the protests, the details of which were not exactly clear despite multiple investigations into a Nazi flag and a Confederate flag seen in the first few days of the city's standstill. Protesters allegedly urinated on a war memorial; however no charges were ever filed.

In late 2021, Trudeau said that the unvaccinated were "often mysoginists" and "racists," while also calling them "extremists" who "don't believe in science."

Justin Trudeau also boasted in the end-of-2022 interview that "people went out and got vaccinated to a higher degree than just about any other country," pointing toward a total vaccination rate of 80.5% for the entire country.

\u201cJustin Trudeau says in a year end interview with CTV\u2019s Omar Sachedina that he doesn\u2019t regret his comments calling truckers and demonstrators people who wear \u201ctinfoil hats.\u201d\n\n\u201cWhen people fall into conspiracy theories, we need to call them out on that.\u201d\u201d
— The Real Andy Lee Show (@The Real Andy Lee Show) 1672599214


\u201cReminder - Justin Trudeau calls the unvaccinated racist and misogynistic extremists\u201d
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1667669251

Horowitz: Time for House Republicans to repeal statist ethanol mandate



Let us choose the fuel we’d like to put in our cars and the biological products we put in our bodies. It’s called freedom.

In 2007, in one of the dumbest and most selfish acts of public policy, Congress mandated that oil refiners blend ethanol into the nation’s gasoline supply in order to reduce CO2 emissions. In reality, blending ethanol with gasoline produces more emissions, because it is less efficient and therefore brings more pain to motorists, makes refining more expensive and difficult, and disrupts the food supply – all during the worst energy and food crisis in recent memory.

Naturally, because our government is engaged in a controlled demolition to curtail our self-reliance, prosperity, and freedom, the EPA has announced it is tightening the biofuels mandate.

Earlier this month, the EPA announced a proposed increase in the renewable fuel standard, requiring refiners to now blend 20.82 billion gallons of biofuels, including ethanol, beginning in 2023. The mandate would rise to 22.68 billion gallons in 2025. When the RFS was established by Congress in 2005, it only set levels through 2022. Which means henceforth, the EPA will just make up its own levels. Now would be the perfect time for Republicans to end the odious ethanol mandate.

If people want to dilute their fuel, they are more than welcome to do so. But why should refiners and consumers be forced to put the equivalent of a face mask on already scarce fuel? Between the ethanol mandate and the electric vehicle fuel mileage mandates, officials are destroying American automobile travel. Unfortunately, both ideas have gotten support from Republicans for years. It’s a disgrace that at a time of high fuel prices, Republicans have not promised to eliminate these counterproductive mandates.

Congress originally mandated ethanol under the guise of reducing CO2 emissions, but in fact ethanol increases CO2. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences earlier this year found that corn-based ethanol is likely at least 24% more carbon-intensive than pure gasoline because of the land use needed to make and process it. So if carbon dioxide is really the enemy – a dubious notion, of course – how can these same global warming fanatics justify diluting our fuel efficiency during this energy crisis?

Then there is the fact that we’re taking 10% of all food grown and turning it into impotent fuel sources during a time of a food shortage. As one Reuters columnist noted, “According to Gro Intelligence, the calories diverted to biofuel production from current policies and future commitments are equivalent to the annual needs of 1.9 billion people.” In total, in 2021, 155 billion liters of biofuels were made. Europe alone converted the equivalent of 5 billion loaves of bread worth of wheat into biofuels.

So we’ve been wasting taxpayer dollars, land, and food for years to destroy refining jobs, raise the cost of food, dilute the efficiency of our fuel, and emit more CO2 (the thing the climate alarmists supposedly want to improve), all to enrich a small industry of lobbyists. Rather than dialing back the ethanol mandates now that there is lower demand for gasoline (thanks to the electric vehicle boondoggle), the government is now trying to use ethanol for electric vehicle recharging! The new EPA rule seeks to incorporate biomass into the electricity grid. So now we’re powering unreliable cars with unreliable electricity.

First, they didn’t want us to drive gasoline cars. Now they are showing that electric vehicles were just a ruse to get rid of the freedom of the automobile altogether. Thanks to the green energy agenda, electricity is becoming even scarcer than gasoline, which is why Switzerland is now placing limits on the use of electric vehicles. Like the story of the frog and the scorpion, after subsidizing wind, solar, and electric vehicles, now they are coming to grips with both the electricity and natural resource shortages that make electric vehicles even less feasible than gasoline automobiles. Which is what they want – a carless society.

\u201cWorld Economic Forum calls for end to private car ownership\nSource: Fox Business (Youtube)\u201d
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1670707784

The time has come for conservatives to stop this mantra of “all of the above” when it comes to energy policy. It’s time for an “all that works” approach, meaning we only pursue the sources that don’t need subsidies and mandates to prop them up. If electric vehicles, wind, solar, and biofuels can stand on their own two feet in a free market, then fine. But if they cannot last after years of endless subsidies and mandates, then they deserve to die before our freedom dies first.

Horowitz: The need to add health status to anti-discrimination law



What would happen if a “private” education or health care facility denied service to someone who not only didn’t take precautions against contracting HIV, but was actually HIV-positive? Could a medical center deny a procedure to such an individual? Could a day care center deny entry to such a kid? Not a chance, because like it or not, we have systemic anti-discrimination laws in place. So why is it that people can be drummed out of public accommodations on account of not getting vaccines that the government directly promotes, endorses, funds, and absolves of liability while working with Big Tech to censor all info about it? In other words, if your red-state Republicans are touting some “private business can do what it wants” argument, they are full of BS.

\u201cKlaus Schwab: Governments and business have to cooperate\u201d
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1669139900

Imagine being Ashley Tipton, a single mother fleeing communist California in search of freedom in Idaho. You enroll your 20-month-old baby in a day care center in Meridian, Idaho, only to be expelled for not having the child get all of the shots, even though the other children have this supposed protection and should not need to violate someone else’s bodily autonomy to be protected. What’s worse is that the lawyer for the Minnesota-based New Horizon Academy sent a letter to Brian Festa, Tipton’s attorney, citing Idaho’s own Republican governor’s support for corporate rights over individual rights as rationale for the policy denying Tipton’s request for a religious exemption. Festa, of We the Patriots USA, is representing Tipton and read a portion of the lawyer’s letter on my podcast last week:

“We note that Idaho is undeniably committed to the private right of businesses to manage their enterprises as they see fit,” read the letter received by Festa. “To that end, earlier this year when the legislature tried to pass the failed Coronavirus Pause Act, which sought to prevent employers from requiring COVID-19 vaccination as a condition to employment, the bill was vetoed by Idaho Gov. Brad Little, citing the bill as an example of governmental overreach into the purview of private business.”

Indeed, Brad Little worked assiduously to block any anti-discrimination measures or even limitations on his emergency powers. This is the attitude of nearly every GOP governor besides Ron DeSantis. They believe that at the same time states have numerous occupational licensing laws, disability laws, occupational safety laws, and yes, anti-discrimination laws, somehow they are powerless to prevent the worst form of discrimination when it comes at the behest of the federal government working with global governments and the entire corporate world to poison people’s bodies on behalf of the most greedy and corrupt industry of all time.

Without that public-private collaboration, the entire vaccination regime would never have gotten off the ground. Without government carving out full liability indemnity for vaccines – a mega courtesy not accorded to any other manufacturer – no business would ever mandate it. Civil rights cannot be a one-way street, especially when they cut against an individual’s own bodily autonomy and religious objections to immunotherapy going into their bodies.

Indeed, the time has come for red states to add health status to civil rights anti-discrimination laws. There is no legal, moral, or scientific rationale to ever require a person to apply a pharmaceutical product on or in a person’s body. If the slate on anti-discrimination law in the private sector were clean, we’d be having a different discussion, but given that it already applies in every other context, you better believe we will apply it where it is needed most.

Take HIV, for example. Contracting HIV is certainly much more the fault of the infected person in 99% of cases than it is with coronavirus, which has proven unavoidable unless you stay under a rock forever. Yet a federal judge in Puerto Rico ruled in 1990 that the zoning department, under pressure from concerned citizens, could not block a permit for construction of a hospice for AIDS patients simply because people had public health concerns.

José Antonio Fusté, former chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, ruled at the time that although there is “great cause for concern” about the AIDS epidemic, “when legitimate concern is fanned by a profound misunderstanding of the causes of AIDS, the rush to panic can easily result in illegal and unjustifiable discrimination against not only the disease's victims but also against the laudable efforts of individuals working to contain the flames.” He concluded that the Puerto Rican authority, “by misguidedly succumbing to community pressure, has itself become a party to such discrimination.”

Even though in the Puerto Rico case, the people themselves irrevocably and permanently were infected with the disease, the 1990 order called the actions taken by the people in the community “irrational” and “unfounded.” “Generalized perceptions about disabilities and unfounded speculations about threats to safety are specifically rejected as grounds to justify exclusion,” wrote Judge Fusté in the 1990 opinion.

It's time we stop blocking people who opt against pharma’s latest toys from vital access to health care and education, especially given that those products are buttressed by federal intervention to the Nth degree. There is no conservative or libertarian argument for keeping these carve-outs in liability and discrimination for just one sector or issue – especially the two together.

Gone are the days when corporations were the bulwark against government tyranny. Far from the nostalgic days of Reagan, the corporations that exist today owe their very dominance to tendentious favors from government and have thus become its greatest collaborators. Nobody explained this agenda clearer than Klaus Schwab at the recent G20 confab in Bali. “Governments and business have to cooperate in order to become a fast fish, because in our world of today, it’s not any more so much the big fish eats the small fish, but it’s the fast fish that eats the slow fish. And in order to be a fast fish, and a big fish, hopefully, like Indonesia, you have to have two copilots: business and government.”

You and I are that “slow fish” in Schwab’s Darwinian design of the Fourth Reich he refers to as the “fourth industrial revolution.” If we don’t have red states interposing against this tyranny swiftly and resolutely, we will be dead fish.

Bill Gates – who caught COVID despite 4 shots – says people over age 50 need vaccine boosters every 6 months, calls popular conspiracy theory about him 'tragic'



Bill Gates – the software developer – continued his media blitz to promote his new book about how he believes the world could prevent the next pandemic. Gates' latest appearance was on CNN – where he called for people over the age of 50 to get COVID-19 vaccine boosters every six months. The Microsoft co-founder also presented his thoughts regarding a popular conspiracy theory about him.

Gates, 66, revealed last week that he was infected with COVID.

"I've tested positive for COVID. I'm experiencing mild symptoms and am following the experts' advice by isolating until I'm healthy again," Gates wrote on Twitter. "I'm fortunate to be vaccinated and boosted and have access to testing and great medical care."

Gates caught COVID despite receiving four doses of the vaccine – two original doses and two booster shots.

CNN host Anderson Cooper told Gates that he had "only gotten three shots total," but had also been infected with COVID-19 in April.

Cooper asked the software developer, "So I've been trying to figure this out for myself, but I assume you know the answer to this, so I'll just ask you, when do you get boosted again?"

Gates responded, "Yeah, so an infection where you'll get a high viral load would be like vaccination, but you know to be safe, every six months you're probably going to be vaccinated."

“For people who are 50 or 60, they will probably have to be boosted every six months until we get even better vaccines,” Gates said during a Friday night appearance on "AC360."

"As we get more data, they might even make that shorter for people, you know, say 60 or over 70, where the duration seems to be a bit lower," Gates continued. "So we're in for ongoing vaccination to stay absolutely safe."

Bill Gates: For people over 50 or 60, they'll probably have to get boosted every 6 months until we get even better vaccines; so we're in for ongoing vaccination to stay absolutely safe...pic.twitter.com/zqHXbCPzkK
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1652611094

Cooper also asked Gates about the popular conspiracy theory that has plagued him over the years.

In the late spring of 2020, unsubstantiated rumors began circulating that the COVID-19 vaccine had tracking microchips in it, and that the Gates Foundation was spending billions of dollars to ensure that all medical procedures implanted microchips into patients.

A YouGov poll from May 2020 found that 28% of Americans believed that "Bill Gates wants to use a mass vaccination campaign against COVID-19 to implant microchips in people that would be used to track people with a digital ID."

The conspiracy theory of Gates using COVID-19 vaccines and medical procedures to implant microchips has been debunked by PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, Reuters, and the BBC.

Cooper told Gates, "You rightly champion [the vaccine], obviously it’s a wonder of modern science, but there's this paradox that the speed at which it was created also increased perhaps some hesitancy, and I guess and has fueled these conspiracy theories.”

Cooper then asked, "How do you deal with conspiracy theories? People believe you're tracking people through microchips inserted into the vaccine."

Gates responded, "Simple explanations are kind of fun to click on. The one about tracking people, I don’t know why they think I’m interested in knowing people’s locations."

He added, "If it's holding people back from getting vaccinated, then that's tragic."

On the topic of COVID vaccine hesitancy, Gates said, "Well, the hesitancy did go down somewhat, you know, initially it was like at 60% of the population, but as they saw their friends getting vaccinated and very rare side effects, as they saw their friends being protected and the people with severe disease were overwhelmingly the unvaccinated, most people came around."

"Now, the U.S. still has a lower full vaccination rate than many other countries, so we still need to figure out: Who do those people trust? Are they open-minded? Because it's to their benefit and to the people around them," he continued. "So I'm surprised that the U.S., it's been this tough, and, you know, even somewhat a political thing."

Gates addressed another conspiracy theory that he is pushing vaccines to make a profit.

"You know, we've given billions for vaccines and saved millions of lives," he stated. "If you just kind of invert that and say, 'No, we’re trying to make money from vaccines, you know, not trying to save lives,' that’s a popular conspiracy theory."

Earlier this month, Gates made headlines for admitting that COVID is "kind of like flu." He also conceded that the vaccines are "imperfect in two very important ways."

Bill Gates admits COVID is 'kind of like flu,' vaccines are 'imperfect in two very important ways,' applauds Australia's quarantine camps, and says Americans aren't great at making sacrifices



Bill Gates – the software developer – has been making the media rounds the past two weeks to promote his new book about preventing a new pandemic. In interviews this week, Gates delivered his opinions on a myriad of COVID-related topics – including the coronavirus lab-leak theory, individual liberties during a pandemic, Australia's quarantine camps, issues with COVID-19 vaccines, and the possibility of climate change causing disease outbreaks.

On Tuesday, Gates was interviewed by CNN host and Washington Post columnist Fareed Zakaria at an event organized by 92nd Street Y – a self-described "cultural and community center where people all over the world connect through culture, arts, entertainment, and conversation."

Gates proclaimed, "The vaccines are imperfect and in two very important ways."

"One is they don't block infection," he said. "We were hoping that the vaccine would create enough antibodies in your upper respiratory tract, including your nose and throat, that vaccinated people wouldn't get infected."

"Well, once Omicron comes along, the vaccine is not reducing transmission, hardly at all, particularly about three or four months after you take the vaccine," Gates noted.

"The other thing is duration," he added. "You know, we're seeing through a variety of the data, Israel data, U.K. data, that particularly if you're in your 70s, within four or five months of taking the vaccine, that protection really is going down. Weirdly for young people, that protection does not seem to go down and we've seen this with previous vaccines."

"The mRNA vaccines are a miracle, but they weren't perfect," he said. "And so next time, people will have much better vaccines and, and better therapeutics as well."

Gates stated, "We're going to create some new flu vaccines that that are much better."

Bill Gates: Vaccines are imperfect in 2 very important ways...pic.twitter.com/kMlnWGty9K
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1651676397

Gates noted that early in the pandemic, "We didn't really understand the fatality rate, you know, we didn't understand that it's a fairly low fatality rate and that it's a disease mainly the elderly, kind of like flu is, although a bit different than that."

"So that was pretty scary period, where the world didn't go on alert, including the United States, nearly as fast as it needed to," Gates told Zakaria.

Something I was cancelled for now Gates now openly says. \n\n\u201cCOVID has a low fatality rate and impacts the elderly like the flu.\u201dpic.twitter.com/US5bIb3W8B
— Aaron Ginn (@Aaron Ginn) 1651721197

Zakaria asked Gates, "Should we accept some restrictions on our liberties?"

Gates responded, "Absolutely. But you know, the U.S., that's not our greatest strength – that is making, in some cases, sacrifice for the collective."

He opined that the U.S. made "incredible sacrifice for the collective goal" during World War II, but Gates believes Americans haven't been willing to make sacrifices since the 9/11 terror attacks.

"We're a society of individual rights, and there's a lot to be said for that," he added. "So we're not optimized for pandemics."

Speaking of civil liberties, Gates praised Australia's draconian COVID-19 response – which included quarantine camps.

Gates said there "weren't many countries" that handled that COVID-19 pandemic well during a Tuesday interview on PBS' "Amanpour and Company."

"But a few responded very quickly to scale up the level of diagnostics, and then they had quarantine policies that were well adhered to," Gates stated. "So Australia stands out, and their death rate is about 10% of other rich countries. So pretty dramatic benefit."

Bill Gates: We're a society of individual rights and there's a lot that could be said for that, so we're not optimized for pandemicspic.twitter.com/8eCb9o3PWL
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1651650099

Last week, Gates sounded the alarm about the possibility of a new, more deadly COVID-19 variant and called for the formation of a global disease outbreak task force that would be controlled by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Gates expounded on the dangers of a new variant in the interview with Zakaria.

"There could be more variants come that would be immune-escaping because their shape of their spike protein would be a little different," he claimed. "And sadly, they could even have a higher fatality rate. You know, I read the chance of that is, you know, maybe 5% to 10%."

Gates advised people they "need to keep boosting." He said "the public should be ready" for mask mandates to be reinstated and "not view it as a deep infringement."

Bill Gates about new variants...pic.twitter.com/6J1U1UM2Sx
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1651648563

Zakaria asked Gates about the warning he made at the 2017 Munich Security Conference in Germany about a "fast-moving airborne pathogen" that "could kill more than 30 million people in less than a year," which he said could happen in 10-15 years.

"I was willing to take risk and go out on a limb, because you know, the modern world is just so susceptible to this human-to-human transmissible respiratory virus," Gates said in the nearly hour-long interview.

"You know, we're invading more area, you know, we're getting into, you know, where bats are having, getting squeezed," he continued. "HIV came through chimpanzees, Ebola came from bats."

Gates also highlighted his prediction that the world was "not ready for the next epidemic" – which he declared during a 2015 TED Talk.

Bill Gates about predicting COVID-19 pandemic in 2015...\nSource: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuNWRoHRzkU&t=2551s\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/lZf2kKHMFs
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1651647011

Gates claimed that climate change increases the risks of a pandemic.

"In these changing ecosystems, have animals seeking new areas to live in, because it gets too hot in the areas they're in, and so they tend to head away from the equator," Gates suggested. "And so as they go into those new habitats, they run into farms."

Gates asserted that there are "too many humans" for all those other animals because humans are "hogging the habitat."

The Microsoft founder warned that "bushmeat markets" and "wet markets" are possible disease outbreak origins because humans are "working in such close proximity" to pigs. He added, "Flu almost always comes out of China because that's where the pigs are."

Bill Gates about climate change and the risk of pandemics...pic.twitter.com/BFnuVF662e
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1651693431

During a Tuesday appearance on "The Daily Show," Gates claimed that climate change would cause more diseases and dismissed the COVID-19 origin possibility of a lab leak.

"Where we should be careful about lab safety," Gates said. "It's quite clear in this case that it came across through animals."

"Almost all our diseases like HIV crossed over from chimpanzees and Africa. Quite some time ago, Ebola came from bats. This also, with one step in between, came from bats. So it's going to keep happening, particularly with climate change, where we're invading a lot of habitats."

.@BillGates: \u201cIt\u2019s quite clear in this case, [Covid] came across through animals. And almost all our diseases, like HIV, crossed over from chimpanzees in Africa quite some time ago; Ebola came from bats, this also, with one step in between came across from bats.\u201dpic.twitter.com/TVfWdUJ1dt
— Tom Elliott (@Tom Elliott) 1651649123

You can watch the entire Bill Gates interview with Fareed Zakaria below.

Bill Gates with Fareed Zakaria: How to Prevent the Next Pandemic www.youtube.com

'I know this sounds crazy': NBC medical expert says carry extra masks on planes, coerce your neighbors to wear them



Physician Dr. Kavita Patel, an NBC News medical contributor, says that you should bring extra face masks with you when flying and essentially demand that the people sitting next to you on the plane wear them.

What did Patel say?

During a recent interview on MSNBC, Dr. Patel advised airplane passengers to self-enforce the travel mask mandate that a federal judge vacated this week.

Admittedly, Patel said her idea sounded "crazy."

"If people want to stay safe, the best thing they can do — high quality mask. And that when possible carry some extra masks," she said.

"I know this sounds crazy, but if you tell someone next to you on a plane — N95 mask or surgical mask and just say, ‘I’ve got an elderly mother at home. I’ve got a child with cancer at home, please do me a favor.' Having the people at least closest to you in that row protecting yourself and them can be the best safety," she continued.

"Carry some extra masks with you, carry some rapid tests with you if you're traveling," she advised.

MSNBC\u2019s Dr Patel: Carry extra masks on planes & force your neighbor to wear onepic.twitter.com/dhkZaFJsyc
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1650467734

Dr. Patel voiced sharp criticism against federal district Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle's decision to void the federal government's mask mandate for travel.

Patel claimed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has the necessary statutory authority to issue and enforce such sweeping mandates and said that allowing Mizelle's ruling to stand establishes a "terrible precedent."

Patel also bemoaned the decision because "kids under 5 have no vaccine and [only have] poor fitting masks."

Anything else?

The Justice Department took action on Wednesday, appealing Judge Mizelle's ruling after the CDC asked the DOJ to do so.

The CDC claimed that a mask mandate for the "indoor transportation corridor remains necessary for the public health" because "wearing masks is most beneficial in crowded or poorly ventilated locations, such as the transportation corridor."

Top airline CEOs, however, disagree that airplanes are poorly ventilated locations.

In fact, American Airlines CEO Doug Parker and Southwest CEO Gary Kelly told the Senate in December that masks should not be required on flights because commercial airplanes are outfitted with the best air filters available on the market.

"I think the case is very strong that masks don't add much, if anything, in the air cabin environment. It is very safe and very high quality compared to any other indoor setting," Kelly said.

"I concur. An aircraft is the safest place you can be. It's true of all of our aircraft — they all have the same HEPA filters and air flow," Parker agreed.

Horowitz: Your mask harms my baby

Even if masks worked, by definition, one who doesn’t wear one could not harm another person. After all, that other individual always has the ability to wear the mask and reap its amazing benefits, if he thinks they exist. On the other hand, it turns out that wearing a mask can actually harm others — the most vulnerable among us.

It was known from day one that children were not at risk from this virus. It was also evident from day one that shutting schools, isolating children, and then only exposing children to humanity through masks would destroy their physical, emotional, and mental health and reverse the language and developmental growth of a generation of children. A new U.K. report chronicles the degree of civilizational arson that was committed against our children, turning an entire generation of children into helpless creatures incapable of talking, learning, and performing basic functions.

“A few providers felt that wearing face masks continued to have a negative impact on children’s communication and language skills,” observed the report from the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (OFSTED). “Children turning 2 years old will have been surrounded by adults wearing masks for their whole lives and have therefore been unable to see lip movements or mouth shapes as regularly. Some providers have reported that delays to children’s speech and language development have led to them not socialising with other children as readily as they would have expected previously.”

While many have already focused on the harm of school closures to children, the shocking devastation to those who were infants and toddlers during the period of social mummification are incalculable and just becoming apparent. The report makes numerous observations regarding the youngest of children, now approximately 3-6 years old:

  • These children have limited vocabulary or lack of confidence to speak.
  • Babies have struggled to respond to basic facial expressions.
  • Children “have started to speak in accents and voices that resemble the material they have watched,” due to excessive screen time to keep them occupied during social isolation.
  • More children need help with basic self-care functions such as blowing their noses, putting on their coats, and tying their shoelaces.
  • More children have trouble telling time.
  • Fewer children are toilet-trained, making more children unready for school by age four.
  • Because of the lockdown, fewer infants and toddlers were walking outside and early childhood day care providers have noticed delays in crawling and walking.

The report notes that the cumulative effect of all these early childhood development problems has created a backlog for specialists in the field. Some communities have seen referrals to speech pathologists rise 22% above pre-lockdown baselines. The U.K. report is based on inspections of 70 nurseries and early child care provider centers between Jan. 17 and Feb. 4, 2022.

At least the U.K. government is coming clean about the devastation a day late, a dollar short. Our government is still covering up the problem, as the CDC is attempting to roll back key language developmental benchmarks for children to accommodate the “new normal.”

One could not possibly have conjured up a more nefarious plot to destroy the future of our children than the confluence of actions taken against them over the past two years. In fact, it’s gotten so bad for children that they might not have enough acumen to even learn about the licentious sexual curriculum these same actors desire to groom them with.

What’s worse than driving older children into depression by denying them normalcy is how little children have been groomed into thinking this sort of lifestyle is normal. In a recent interview, Yuval Harari, an adviser to the World Economic Forum, described that this great reset and new “industrial revolution” will make human beings the product. He stated that they are “learning to produce bodies and minds.” Are these the sort of bodies and minds he is thinking of? Turning us into a bunch of incapable, bungling fools who can’t function and are fully controlled by global governments?

\u201cThe product this time will be humans themselves. We are basically learning to produce bodies and minds. \nThe problem [with the lower classes] is boredom and what to do with them. How will they find some sense of meaning in life when they are basically meaningless, worthless.\u201dpic.twitter.com/4y7HKdRwSu
— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1649578551

There is no doubt that this was done by design, because there was no way any sane government official could have thought children were at risk for the virus, and certainly not enough to wreak such destruction upon them. If officials were blind to the facts the first week, they could always have come around a week or two or even a month or two later. Yet they allowed this to go on for one to two years, and in some places like New York City, they are still criminalizing the breathing of toddlers.

A recent study of COVID-positive hospitalizations in the U.K. found that, in one large children’s hospital, only 10% of the few children hospitalized with COVID actually had severe COVID symptoms. 56% of them were incidental infections discovered by mass testing. We have been making this point since May 2020, but it did not stop the politicians from running with false information to prolong the misery of children.

Not only were children never at risk from the virus, but even if they were, there is zero evidence that masks work. The Brownstone Institute posted a list of 150 studies and articles showing masks don’t work to stop the spread of viruses, something our government knew from day one of this pandemic. A recent population-based observational study of 600K schoolchildren 3-11 years old concluded, “Mandates in schools were not associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 incidence or transmission, suggesting that this intervention was not effective."

The only trial that was purported to show efficacy was the Bangladeshi study, which turned out to be fraudulent in many ways, and once we got the full data set, it showed no statistically significant difference from the control group.

We were absurdly told that our mask protects the other person while his mask evidently doesn’t protect him. Well, it’s time to tell these people that their mask doesn’t just harm themselves but the most vulnerable among us. It traumatizes a generation of babies and hampers their language development indefinitely. If a lack of science can engender government to criminalize bare breathing, then real science and learned experience should require us to ban masking. Breathing is a human right. Masking is not.