Displaying posts categorized under

MEDICINE AND HEALTH

Trans treatments are the new lobotomy David Strom

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2022/10/01/trans-treatments-are-the-new-lobotomy-n500226

It’s no secret that transitioning to something you are not is a fad.

By this I do not mean that nobody experiences genuine dysphorias that require treatment, and I freely admit that my experience and education are insufficient to the task of developing treatment plans for people who are genuinely suffering from what appears to me to be a serious mental health problem. Dancing around a bit more to cover myself, I will also emphasize that calling dysphoria a mental illness is not a slam or slander: mental health problems run in my family and they are serious conditions that need treatment.

Unfortunately, the science of treating mental illness is not especially good, and the treatments themselves have at times been cruel, destructive, and sometimes downright evil. Portuguese neurologist Egas Moniz invented the Frontal Lobotomy and won the Nobel Prize for doing so. Countless people, including children who were deemed too disruptive, suffered from permanent damage to their brains because of a fad.

Tens of thousands of lobotomies were performed, at first only on those suffering from schizophrenia and severe depression, but later on patients with chronic headaches as well as criminals and even children as young as four years old. Beulah Jones was an adult when she underwent the lobotomy in 1953. Her granddaughter, Christine Johnson, describes what she was like after the procedure.

Ms. CHRISTINE JOHNSON (Beulah Jones’ Granddaughter): She was strange because she would do things like rock in place. She didn’t make a lot of sense when she talked. And she didn’t talk about the same things that other adults talked about. She was–childlike is probably the best description.

Biden orders 171 million doses of fifth Covid booster with a safety study on a grand total of 8 mice By Thomas Lifson

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/10/biden_orders_171_million_doses_of_fifth_covid_booster_with_a_safety_study_on_a_grand_total_of_8_mice.html

Dr. Joseph Mercola reports on Substack:

August 31, 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the reformulated COVID bivalent booster shots by Moderna and Pfizer1 — all without the required convening of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), which would typically discuss or vote on the authorization or approval of a new vaccine.

Instead, the FDA pushed the matter before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). ACIP met for eight hours September 1, 2022, and authorized the untested boosters 13-to-1.2 3 CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky endorsed the recommendation later that evening. (snip)

As explained in “What They’re Not Telling You About the New mRNA Boosters,” the emergency authorization of these reformulated boosters is based on nothing more than preliminary test results from a grand total of eight mice,6 and that data hasn’t even been released to the public. (snip)

A key take-home here is that efficacy against infection and severe disease has NEVER been ascertained. Those trials were not done for the original shot, and won’t be done for the reformulated boosters. Yet the efficacy of these boosters is assumed and declared as having been “proven” based on the original trials.

Talk about a circular argument! It’s just assumptions piled upon assumptions. Yet, based on the antibody response in eight mice alone, the Biden administration has now ordered 171 million doses of the two boosters.

This blog is not intended to offer medical advice. Always consult a physician you trust and inform yourself of all the facts making any medical decisions.

The “T” Piggybacking on the “LGB” Polls make clear that Americans across political persuasions have major reservations about “gender-affirming” care for minors and teaching gender-identity ideology in schools.Leor Sapir

https://www.city-journal.org/the-hidden-transgender-consensus

Few issues these days inspire agreement among large swathes of voters from both parties, but one notable exception appears to be gender-identity policies.

Last April, a Marist poll commissioned by the organization Do No Harm asked 1,377 Americans about their views on the infiltration of “social justice” ideology into medicine. One question asked whether “minors who identify as transgender and want to undergo hormone treatment or gender transition surgery” should be able to do so “without parental consent,” “only with parental consent,” or not until adulthood (regardless of parental consent). Only 10 percent of all adults surveyed said that minors should be able to access these interventions without parental consent. Twenty-five percent said that parental consent should be required, and 60 percent said minors should never be subject to hormonal or surgical interventions in this context (5 percent were unsure). These findings more or less track with those from a recent New York Times/Siena Poll on (among other things) teaching “sexual orientation and gender identity” content in elementary schools, and it is reasonable to assume that the same people who believe it’s unacceptable for teachers to introduce first-graders to, say, the concept of “non-binary” also think that 12-year-old children should not be given puberty blockers for feeling like they were “born in the wrong body.”

It’s useful to compare the Marist poll with yet another recent poll, this one by Pew, which deals with gender-identity issues, as a way to illustrate the importance of how questions are phrased. The Pew poll asked whether it should be “illegal for health care professionals to provide someone younger than 18 with medical care for a gender transition.” Note how this phrasing avoids specifying the procedures (hormones and surgeries), uses terms like “professionals” and “medical care,” and shifts the focus from the procedures themselves to the issue of state involvement in the doctor-patient relationship. Unsurprisingly, public opinion was more evenly divided in the Pew poll, though a plurality still favored restrictions: 46 percent said they support making it illegal for providers to administer medical intervention, 30 percent opposed it, and 22 percent were undecided.

Biden’s Alzheimer’s Lapse He takes credit for savings caused by not paying for a new drug.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-alzheimers-lapse-drug-medicare-premiums-aduhelm-biogen-11664403263?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

President Biden on Tuesday claimed credit for a modest decline in Medicare premiums, but he forgot to mention the reason: His Administration is rationing a novel Alzheimer’s drug.

“This year, the American people won, and Big Pharma lost,” the President said in a speech in which he accused Republicans of seeking to gut entitlements and flogged Medicare drug price controls that Democrats are using to pay for $369 billion in new climate spending. But Democrats are the party slashing Medicare via cost rationing.

He continued: “This morning, we got more even good news about lowering costs. The Department of Health and Human Services announced that the premium for Part B will, in fact, decrease this [upcoming] year,” adding that “for years, that fee has gone up. Now, for the first time in more than a decade, it’s going to go down.”

Mr. Biden wants Americans to believe that drug price controls are reducing premiums. But here’s the deal: His Administration increased Part B premiums by 14.5% this year and blamed the increase on expected high demand for Biogen’s Alzheimer’s drug Aduhelm, which the Food and Drug Administration approved last summer.

How Young Is Too Young for Sterilization? An influential transgender advocacy group releases new recommendations based on politics—not science. Lisa Selin Davis

https://www.commonsense.news/p/how-young-is-too-young-for-sterilization?utm_source=email

“To calm this strife, WPATH could have produced an evidence-based, apolitical document for physicians and others desperately seeking guidance. That’s not what happened. The new guidelines are “a weird amalgam of pseudo-medical speech, and political statements, and fetishistic practices,” said Julia Mason, a pediatrician in Oregon and a clinical advisor to the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine. Dr. Mason added that she was dismayed that WPATH rejected the chapter on ethics that had been in an earlier draft, but retained the chapter on eunuchs. (These guidelines see eunuchs not as a deeply tragic part of history but as a “gender identity” which health care professionals should support.)”

What do you do if you are the parent of a child who believes they were born in the wrong body? What if your kid doesn’t fit the stereotypical behavior of their sex—your daughter is a tomboy, your son is effeminate—and a teacher or school counselor suggests they might be transgender? What if your teenager, uncomfortable with their changing body at puberty, says they will harm themselves—or worse—if they are not allowed to medically transition?

A growing number of parents are facing such questions in 2022. Desperate for answers, they are turning to the experts: the doctors, psychologists, and professional organizations devoted to diagnosing and treating gender dysphoria.

Among the most important of these associations is the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). Founded in 1979, it is regarded by many as a premier advocacy group for medical care, education, and research regarding transgender and “gender diverse” people. Though it’s not a medical association—in addition to doctors and psychologists, its ranks include lawyers, educators, students, and electrologists—WPATH’s Standards of Care are considered by practitioners around the world to be the gold standard of recommendations for treating gender-related distress.

WPATH has just released a long-awaited update to those Standards of Care for people seeking “lasting personal comfort with their gendered selves.” This 260-page update— the eighth version of WPATH’s standards—includes several new chapters. One is on the increasing number of nonbinary individuals. A second is on supportive care for “those who identify as eunuchs” and “may also seek castration to better align their bodies with their gender identity” (yes, you read that right). A third, and perhaps the most anticipated, is on the treatment of transgender of gender diverse adolescents—added, writes WPATH, due to “the exponential growth in adolescent referral rates.”

British Cardiologist Who Initially Promoted COVID Vaccines, Releases Peer Reviewed Papers Calling For Suspension of mRNA Shots By Debra Heine

https://amgreatness.com/2022/09/27/british-cardiologist-who-initially-promoted-covid-vaccines-releases-peer-reviewed-papers-calling-for-suspension-of-mrna-shots/

Dr. Aseem Malhotra, an eminent British cardiologist who helped promote the mRNA vaccines when they were first rolled out, is now calling for the suspension of the injections until all the raw data from clinical trials are released for independent scrutiny, and all adverse side effects are fully investigated, the World Council For Health reported.

In a two-part peer-reviewed paper published in the Journal of Insulin Resistance on Monday, Malhotra presented real world data revealing that in the non-elderly population, the risk of suffering a serious adverse event from the jabs are greater than the any benefits. [See part one here, part two here.].

Malhotra is a Consultant Cardiologist, Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians, and President of the Public Health Collaboration, and an honorary council member to the Metabolic Psychiatry Clinic at Stanford University school of medicine California.  He is an internationally renowned expert in the prevention, diagnosis and management of heart disease.

His re-analysis of Pfizer and Moderna randomized controlled trial data also found that the risk of suffering serious adverse effects of mRNA vaccines for individuals is significantly higher than the risk of being hospitalized with Covid-19.

The study found that the international roll-out of mRNA vaccination program overstated benefits of vaccination especially in low-risk populations, and the under-reported adverse events.

Commenting on the report, Malhotra said, “There has been a rise in out of hospital cardiac arrests and heart attacks linked to Pfizer’s Covid-19 mRNA vaccine with plausible biological mechanisms of harm.” He added, “pharmacovigilance systems and real-world safety data, coupled with plausible mechanisms of harm, are deeply concerning, especially in relation to cardiovascular safety.”

Judicial Watch: New Documents Reveal COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Used by HHS were Conducted in China

https://www.judicialwatch.org/covid-vaccine-studies-conducted-in-china/?utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members

Judicial Watch announced today that it received 115 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) revealing previously redacted locations of COVID-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The records were obtained through a September 2021 FOIA lawsuit filed after the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease failed to respond to a June 7, 2021, FOIA request for all biodistribution studies and data for the COVID-19 vaccines (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-02418)).

The newly unredacted documents reveal the following Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine studies’ locations:

A document with the filename, “ s_r_IND 19736 0 105 2.6.5 pharmkintabulated-summary” identifies all in vitro metabolic stability studies of ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 (synthetic lipids in the vaccines) were conducted at Medicilon Preclinical Research LLC, a testing facility located in Shanghai, China. Studies within this record indicate work was done in August 2020.
A document with the filename, “s_r_IND 19736-0-253 Section 2.6.5 pharmkintabulated-summary” identifies that all in vitro metabolic stability studies of ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 were conducted at Medicilon Preclinical Research LLC, a testing facility located in Shanghai, China. Studies within this record indicate work was done in August 2020.

CDC Oversells the ‘Bivalent’ Covid Shot The FDA approved it without clinical trials, and there’s reason to doubt it beats the original vaccine. By Paul A. Offit

https://www.wsj.com/articles/cdc-oversells-the-bivalent-covid-shot-hospitalizations-vaccine-booster-omicron-pandemic-pfizer-moderna-china-illness-death-11663793472?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that everyone over 12 receive a “bivalent” Covid-19 vaccine as a booster dose. But only a select group are likely to benefit, and the evidence to date doesn’t support the view that a bivalent vaccine containing omicron or its subvariants is better than the monovalent vaccine. The CDC risks eroding the public’s trust by overselling the new shot.

The existing Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines were designed to protect against the original strain of the novel coronavirus, known as Wuhan-1. The strain that left China, however, was D614G, the first variant. Between January 2020 and December 2021, D614G was replaced by the alpha variant then the delta variant. At the end of 2021, Oxford conducted a study to determine whether the mRNA vaccines still provided protection against severe illness and death caused by the variants. They did.

Then things changed. At the end of 2021, the omicron variant (BA.1) and its subvariants (BA.2, BA.3, BA.4 and BA.5) supplanted delta. Not only was omicron more contagious than delta; it also evaded immunity. Even the fully vaccinated were at risk of mild illness, and some of severe illness. A third dose was recommended, then a fourth. The CDC found that both a third and fourth dose reduced hospitalizations.

But not everyone benefited. Those who did fell into three groups: the elderly, people with serious health problems and people who were immunocompromised. As the CDC launches its fall booster dose campaign, it would be wise to focus on those at risk rather than the young and healthy.

MIT Study: Vaccine Hesitancy Is ‘Highly Informed, Scientifically Literate,’ and ‘Sophisticated’ Rick Moran

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2021/07/17/mit-study-vaccine-hesitancy-is-highly-informed-scientifically-literate-and-sophisticated-n1462591

Vaccine hesitancy is a big problem, according to the Biden administration.  Less than half the public is fully vaccinated while about 56 percent have received at least one jab.

The goal of fully vaccinating the American public appears to have stalled. This should not surprise us. When the vaccines were first approved for emergency use back in December 2020, 40 percent of Americans expressed skepticism about the vaccine.

Trying to shame the holdouts has failed spectacularly. Insulting and degrading them as “morons” or “ignorant” has resulted in a vicious pushback and a hardening of positions on getting vaccinated.

The administration’s plan of sending people door to door to vaccinate them only feeds anti-vaccine skepticism. Trust in authority is at an all-time low, which makes a government-sponsored vaccine program suspect.

Still, most experts agree that some people who should be getting vaccinated aren’t doing so. But the root cause isn’t ignorance or a belief in conspiracy theories. An MIT study on the problem revealed some surprising results.

What Does Walensky’s Apology Really Mean? The CDC director confessed last month that the agency had failed during Covid—but her mea culpa is likely designed to protect against serious reform. Carl J. Schramm

https://www.city-journal.org/what-does-walenskys-apology-really-mean?wallit_nosession=1

The indigenous wisdom of the Yukon suggests that if wolves are pursuing your sled, it’s a good idea to throw out a piece of meat to buy time. This advice comes to mind in trying to understand what happened last month, when Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), once one of the U.S. government’s most respected public agencies, made a public apology for its failures during the Covid pandemic. “For 75 years,” Walensky told a press gathering on August 15, “CDC and public health have been preparing for Covid-19, and in our big moment, our performance did not reliably meet expectations.”

Walensky said that the mea culpa was prompted by preliminary findings of an internal panel she appointed in April to improve CDC management. Its conclusions are not yet public. Her confession puzzled Washington’s political and bureaucratic establishment, and uncritical national media has mostly ignored her statement. After such a bombshell, one would expect appearances on television and plentiful commentary. But so far, the establishment and press are treading carefully. Why? Perhaps because they know that this initial disturbance to the pond might send ripples in their direction.

Consider that, just four days before Walensky’s statement, the CDC undid much of the guidance it had spent more than two years inventing, justifying, and enforcing. On August 11, the CDC substantially relaxed its Covid guidance by dropping social distancing, suggesting that masking is needed only around sick people or those with an active case, and dropping the need to quarantine for unvaccinated individuals, suggesting instead a five-day period of self-imposed isolation. Routine testing by employers and schools is no longer part of CDC guidance. The CDC largely removed schools, businesses, and institutions from an enforcement role on social distancing, masking, and quarantining and reduced its suggested booster frequency to once a year.