All they would have to do is simply request a few documents from the CDC. The CDC won’t be able to provide any of the documents, but they would have no excuse for not supporting their request.
A single honest, but courageous public health official could put an end to the false narrative insanity and prove to the world that the emperor has no clothes just by making a few document requests of the CDC.
Here are some suggestions that would expose the fraud, but this is not a complete list. I just want to show how easy it would be for someone like Florida’s Surgeon General Joe Ladapo or Maui’s Lorrin Pang to end the deception.
Pang had the courage to speak the truth about ivermectin and HCQ (two drugs that we know for sure work) and was recently cleared of all charges. Now that’s he’s cleared that hurdle, perhaps he’s willing to take the next step and ask for these four documents.
Can you imagine what would happen to him next? Maui regulators would charge Pang with asking the CDC for evidence backing their decisions. Surely, that has to be a criminal offense in Maui, isn’t it?
Seriously, the nice thing about these document requests is that it doesn’t require any courage because asking for information does not require any of these people have to take a position on the issue. All they are doing is asking for evidence so they can do their job in properly letting people know if there is solid evidence or not that shows that the vaccines are safe.
Who will have the courage to ask the CDC for the information that every single honest public health official would want to see?
Here are my suggestions for document requests from these public health officials to the CDC
- Risk-benefit analysis. The risk-benefit analysis stratified by age, using the mortality data from VAERS and the URF using the CDC’s methodology (published a year ago by five CDC authors) which the CDC uses to justify their vaccine recommendation. See this article for more info.
- Clinical trial autopsy reports. The 21 autopsy reports filed with the FDA in the Pfizer EUA application that show that each of the deaths in the vaccine group were properly tested for the possibility that they died from the vaccine or a clear and convincing explanation as to how Pfizer could know this for certain without doing such tests. See this article for more info.
- Blood clot analysis. The written analysis that the CDC did on these massive telltale blood clots that have been found in up to 93% of people being embalmed.
- This is a major health emergency that has been brought to the CDC’s attention. What did their investigation reveal as to the cause of these deadly clots and how can they possibly be happening in up to 93% of the cases? The CDC refused to get blood clot videos and tissue samples that Steve Kirsch offered. This a a critical public health issue so presumably, this is because the CDC already has numerous videos and tissue samples.
- Mask mandate necessity analysis. The written analysis that the CDC relied upon when it asserted that the mask mandate shouldn’t be overturned because “at this time an order requiring masking in the indoor transportation corridor remains necessary for the public health.” That written analysis would necessarily explain why gold-standard randomized trials such as the Denmark and Bangladesh studies which both showed no measurable effect of masking were ignored. The document should also explain why the Finland study was rejected by the CDC as well. What was the fatal flaw that the CDC found that nobody else on Earth noticed? And why did they ignore the conclusions of hundreds of studies showing masks don’t work.
- Why did the very recent study in school-aged children in Spain fail to find an effect if masking kids is so important? What mistake did they make? Surely, they’ve got a good reason for rejecting all of these studies, and the public has a right to know why since they want to mandate this on the public. Which mask studies are the CDC holding up as the gold standard above all these studies and why? The report should include how the CDC determined “necessary”? Is necessary based on an absolute effect size? If so, what is it? Or is it based on a relative risk reduction? So if it would reduce deaths by .001%, is that the criteria for MANDATING a public health intervention that according to the Finland study could very likely increase the rate of infection (watch at 3 minutes)? The public is left in the dark on how the “necessary” determination is made. Also, if cloth masks work, then how come even the Bangladesh study authors flatly admitted that they don’t?
- VAERS safety signal analysis. A document explaining how the CDC could possibly have missed the elevated symptoms in VAERS that started happening in January 2021. For example, pulmonary embolism reporting rate jumped by over 1,000 fold. How could the CDC not detect this and investigate the cause? Since it wasn’t the vaccine, what caused the 1,000-fold reporting increase in this and other symptoms? Why did pulmonary embolism generate a safety signal in January or February 2021? Also, in what month did myocarditis finally generate a safety signal? Can we see the monthly reports showing when it “popped up” on the radar?
- Number of vaccine injured. A document showing the current number of vaccine injured. This should be at least 5 million Americans at this point (based on the Israeli data, VAERS data, and doctor reports). If the vaccines are so safe, what is causing so many injuries?
Is there an intellectually curious public health official out there that will request this information?
I’d ask myself, but these agencies don’t answer me when I ask for this info even though I have more readers than 90% of the newspapers in the US.
Please forward this widely
That’s what it will take to find a public health official who still has some critical thinking skills left.
Subscribe to Steve Kirsch’s newsletter
Thousands of paid subscribers
I write about COVID vaccine safety and efficacy, corruption, censorship, mandates, masking, and early treatments. America is being misled by formerly trusted authorities.
|Timothy JAE35 min ago·edited 34 min agoOnce again, Steve demonstrates that we don’t defeat liars with arguments: we defeat them with questions. It is only a matter of formulating the right question, like a dagger aimed at the vitals, and Steve has the intuition of a prosecuting attorney. I have learned from him to apply this lesson in my own life as well, to expose crime rather than try to bury it. Maybe you are learning this lesson too.|