• Let’s Talk Detox on Better Way Today
    You can also find this video on: Rumble | Facebook | Bitchute

    Join us as we learn all about detoxification with our resident health coach, Linda Rae. Linda shares her knowledge on detoxing – what it is, why it matters, and how to do it right. So sit down, grab a pencil and paper, and get ready to detox!

    We live on a poisoned planet. Whether it’s fluoride in the water, chemtrail agents in the air, parabens in cosmetics, or pesticides sprayed on our vegetables – it’s a challenge to avoid toxins these days.

    Linda’s presentation identifies sources of toxic substances to be aware of, the body’s organ systems they affect, symptoms to look out for, and actions we can take to reduce exposure to toxins and get rid of them from our bodies. From nutritious, protective food choices to homemade deodorants, skin brushing, and castor oil packs, there is a lot we can do.

    Linda’s detox basics presentation can be found here as a standalone video as well – perfect for sharing with family and friends!

    Tune in for the latest Better News with Christof Plothe, DO and Emma Sron, World Council for Health announcements, and to see where WCH has been out and about in the last week! Here is some of what we discussed on today’s show:

    Australians abandon failed mRNA Covid shots

    Historic #FluorideLawsuit Happening Right Now: Everything You Need to Know

    5 Takeaways From This Week’s Testimony in Landmark Fluoride Trial

    The WHO Overplays its Hand and Watches Support Drain Away

    Photos from the Irish Expedition to expose the WHO power grab

    All eyes on Ireland and the Crotty Judgment

    More About Linda Rae

    Linda is a certified Health Coach and founder of Blissful Mum, a health coaching service that offers personalised health coaching to empower mothers to prioritise their well-being, ensuring they can create a nurturing and joyful family environment.
    Drawing on her training as a health coach and her professional experience in occupational therapy and mental health, combined with personal experience of being a mother of two young boys, Linda provides tailored support to help mothers navigate the complexities of motherhood, improve their health, and find fulfillment in their roles.
    Linda’s mission is to foster happy families by guiding mothers toward a balanced and healthy lifestyle.
    View all previous episodes of our live shows here.

    Mhttps://rumble.com/v4cyra6-lets-talk-detox-on-better-way-today.html
    Let’s Talk Detox on Better Way Today You can also find this video on: Rumble | Facebook | Bitchute Join us as we learn all about detoxification with our resident health coach, Linda Rae. Linda shares her knowledge on detoxing – what it is, why it matters, and how to do it right. So sit down, grab a pencil and paper, and get ready to detox! We live on a poisoned planet. Whether it’s fluoride in the water, chemtrail agents in the air, parabens in cosmetics, or pesticides sprayed on our vegetables – it’s a challenge to avoid toxins these days. Linda’s presentation identifies sources of toxic substances to be aware of, the body’s organ systems they affect, symptoms to look out for, and actions we can take to reduce exposure to toxins and get rid of them from our bodies. From nutritious, protective food choices to homemade deodorants, skin brushing, and castor oil packs, there is a lot we can do. Linda’s detox basics presentation can be found here as a standalone video as well – perfect for sharing with family and friends! Tune in for the latest Better News with Christof Plothe, DO and Emma Sron, World Council for Health announcements, and to see where WCH has been out and about in the last week! Here is some of what we discussed on today’s show: Australians abandon failed mRNA Covid shots Historic #FluorideLawsuit Happening Right Now: Everything You Need to Know 5 Takeaways From This Week’s Testimony in Landmark Fluoride Trial The WHO Overplays its Hand and Watches Support Drain Away Photos from the Irish Expedition to expose the WHO power grab All eyes on Ireland and the Crotty Judgment More About Linda Rae Linda is a certified Health Coach and founder of Blissful Mum, a health coaching service that offers personalised health coaching to empower mothers to prioritise their well-being, ensuring they can create a nurturing and joyful family environment. Drawing on her training as a health coach and her professional experience in occupational therapy and mental health, combined with personal experience of being a mother of two young boys, Linda provides tailored support to help mothers navigate the complexities of motherhood, improve their health, and find fulfillment in their roles. Linda’s mission is to foster happy families by guiding mothers toward a balanced and healthy lifestyle. View all previous episodes of our live shows here. Mhttps://rumble.com/v4cyra6-lets-talk-detox-on-better-way-today.html
    0 Comments 0 Shares 17810 Views
  • Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule
    A review paper published last week in the journal Cureus is the first peer-reviewed paper to call for a global moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. The authors say that reanalyzed data from the vaccine makers’ trials and high rates of serious post-injection injuries indicate the mRNA gene therapy vaccines should not have been authorized for use.

    Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.
    global moratorium mrna covid vaccine feature
    Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.

    Governments should endorse a global moratorium on mRNA vaccines until all questions about their safety have been thoroughly investigated, according to the authors of a new, peer-reviewed article on the COVID-19 vaccine trials and the global vaccination campaign published last week in Cureus, Journal of Medical Science.

    Cureus is a web-based peer-reviewed open-access general medical journal using prepublication peer review.

    The authors surveyed published research on the pharmaceutical companies’ vaccine trials and related adverse events. They also called for the COVID-19 vaccines to be removed immediately from the childhood immunization schedule.

    After the first reports from vaccine trials claimed they were 95% effective in preventing COVID-19, serious problems with method, execution and reporting in the trials became public, which the paper reviewed in detail.

    Evidence also shows the products never underwent adequate safety and toxicological testing, and since the vaccine rollout, researchers have identified a significant number of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs).

    Authors M. Nathaniel Mead, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., Russ Wolfinger, Ph.D., Jessica Rose, Ph.D., Kris Denhaerynck, Ph.D., Steve Kirsch and Dr. Peter McCullough detailed the vaccines’ potential serious harms to humans, vaccine control and processing issues, the mechanisms behind AEs, the immunological reasons for vaccine inefficacy and the mortality data from the registrational trials.

    They concluded, “Federal agency approval of the COVID-19 mRNA injectable products on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits.”

    They also called for the vaccines to be immediately removed from the childhood immunization schedule and for the suspension of the boosters.

    “It is unethical and unconscionable to administer an experimental vaccine to a child who has a near-zero risk of dying from COVID-19 (IFR, 0.0003%) but a well-established 2.2% risk of permanent heart damage based on the best prospective data available,” they wrote.

    Finally, the authors called for a full investigation into misconduct by the pharmaceutical companies and the regulatory agencies.

    It is the first peer-reviewed study to call for a moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA products, Rose told The Defender.

    “Once a proper assessment of the safety and efficacy claims was made herein — upon which the emergency use authorization (EUA)’s and ultimate final authorizations were granted — it was found that the COVID-19 injectable products were neither safe nor effective,” she added.

    According to McCollough, “mRNA should never have been authorized for human use.”

    Lead author Mead told The Defender, “Our view is that any risk-benefit analysis must consider how much the presumed benefit in terms of reduced COVID-19 related mortality is offset by the potential increase in vaccine-induced mortality.”

    Here are six takeaways from the review:

    1. The COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ are reclassified gene therapies that were rushed through the regulatory process in a historically unprecedented manner

    Before the seven-month authorization process for the mRNA vaccines, no vaccine had ever gone to market without undergoing testing of at least four years, with typical timelines averaging 10 years.

    To speed the process, the companies skipped preclinical studies of potential toxicity from multiple doses and cut the typical 6-12 month observation period for identifying longer-term adverse effects and the established 10-15-year period for monitoring for long-term effects such as cancer and autoimmune disorders, the authors wrote.

    The trials prioritized documenting effective symptom reduction over SAE and mortality. This was particularly concerning, the authors argued, because mRNA products are gene therapy products reclassified as vaccines and then given EUA for the first time ever for use against a viral disease.

    However, the gene therapies’ components have not been thoroughly evaluated for safety for use as vaccines.

    There is an uninvestigated and major concern that the mRNA could transform body cells into viral protein factories — with no off-switch — that produce the spike protein for a prolonged period causing chronic systemic inflammation and immune dysfunction.

    The spike protein in the vaccine, the authors said, is associated with more severe immunopathology and other AEs than the spike protein in the virus itself.

    The authors suggested that massive government investment in mRNA technology, including hundreds of millions before the pandemic and tens of billions once it began, meant, “U.S. federal agencies were strongly biased toward successful outcomes for the registrational trials.”

    The financial incentives along with political pressures to deliver a rapid solution likely influenced a series of flawed decisions that compromised the integrity of the trials and downplayed serious scientific concerns about risks with the technology, they added.

    RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax
    RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax”

    Order Now

    2. Steps were taken in trials to overestimate vaccine efficacy

    Because the trials were designed to assess whether the mRNA vaccine reduced symptoms, they did not measure whether the vaccines prevented severe disease and death. Yet the vaccine makers repeatedly claimed that they do.

    “No large randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials have ever demonstrated reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission, hospitalization, or death,” the authors wrote.

    Additionally, the number of people who contracted clinical COVID-19 in both the placebo and intervention groups was “too small to draw meaningful, pragmatic, or broad-sweeping conclusions with regard to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.”

    Pfizer’s 95 % efficacy claims were based on 162 of 22,000 placebo recipients contracting PCR-confirmed COVID-19 compared to eight of 22,000 in the vaccine group. None of the placebo recipients died from COVID-19. In the Moderna trials, only one placebo death was attributed to COVID-19.

    There was also a much larger percentage of “suspected COVID-19 cases” in both groups, with participants showing COVID-19 symptoms but a negative PCR test. When factoring in those cases, measures of vaccine efficacy drop to about 19%.

    The trial subject pool was comprised of largely young and healthy individuals, excluding key groups — children, pregnant women, elderly and immunocompromised people — which can also obscure the vaccine’s actual efficacy and safety.

    Findings from reanalyses of data from the Pfizer trials can be interpreted as showing the vaccines made “no significant difference” in reducing all-cause mortality in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups at 20 weeks into the trial, the authors wrote.

    Even the six-month post-marketing data Pfizer presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed no reduction in all-cause mortality from the vaccine.

    The authors reanalyzed that data, adjusting the analysis of deaths to better account for the fact that when Pfizer unblinded the study people from the placebo group took the vaccine, and found the vaccine group had a higher mortality rate (0.105%) than the unvaccinated group (0.0799%), which they said was a conservative estimate.

    One of the most glaring issues with the registrational trials, they noted, was that they exclusively focused on measuring risk reduction — the ratio of COVID-19 symptom rates in the vaccine group versus the placebo group — rather than measuring absolute risk reduction, which is the likelihood someone will show COVID-19 symptoms relative to people in the population at large.

    According to FDA guidelines, accounting for both approaches is crucial to avoid the misguided use of pharmaceutical products — but the data were omitted, leading to an overestimation of an intervention’s clinical utility.

    While both vaccines touted an approximately 95% risk reduction figure as their efficacy figure, the absolute risk reductions for Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines were 0.7% and 1.1% respectively.

    “A substantial number of individuals would need to be injected in order to prevent a single mild-to-moderate case of COVID-19,” the authors wrote.

    As an example, using a conservative estimate that 119 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent infection, and assuming that COVID-19 had a 0.23% infection fatality rate, they wrote that approximately 52,000 vaccinations would be necessary to prevent a single COVID-19-related death.

    However, “Given trial misconduct and data integrity problems … the true benefit is likely to be much lower,” they wrote.

    And, they added, one would need to assess that benefit along with harms, which they estimate to be 27 deaths per 100,000 doses of Pfizer. That means, using the most conservative estimates, “for every life saved, there were 14 times more deaths caused by the modified mRNA injections.”

    They also noted that post-rollout evidence confirmed the efficacy claims were overstated. For example, two large cohort Cleveland clinic studies showed the vaccine could not confer protection against COVID-19 — instead, in those trials, more vaccinated people were more likely to contract COVID-19.

    One study showed the risk of “breakthrough” infection was significantly higher among people who were boosted and that more vaccinations resulted in a greater risk of COVID-19.

    A second study showed adults who were not “up-to-date” with their shots had a 23% lower incidence of COVID-19 than their “up-to-date” colleagues.

    3. The trials underestimated the adverse events, including death, despite evidence in the data.

    Harms were also underreported and underestimated for a number of reasons, according to the authors, a practice that tends to be common in randomized industry-sponsored vaccine trials in general and “exceptionally evident” here.

    First, because Pfizer unblinded the trial within just a few weeks of the emergency use authorization and allowed people in the placebo group to take the vaccine, there was not sufficient time to identify late-occurring harms because there was no longer a control group.

    “Was this necessary, given that none of the deaths in the Pfizer trial were attributed to COVID-19 as the primary cause, and given the very low IFR [infection fatality rate] for a relatively healthy population?” they asked.

    Also, trial coordinators were “haphazard” in their approach to monitoring AEs. They prioritized documenting events thought to be related to COVID-19 rather than to the vaccines for the first seven days and only recorded “unsolicited” AEs for 30-60 days. After that period, even very SAEs, like death, were not recorded. Even for the AEs recorded in the first seven days, they only solicited data from 20% of the population.

    None of the trial data was independently verified. “Such secrecy may have enabled the industry to more easily present an inflated and distorted estimate of the genetic injections’ benefits, along with a gross underestimation of potential harms,” they wrote.

    Subsequent analysis by Michels et al. revealed that deaths and other SAEs — like life-threatening conditions, inpatient hospitalization or extension of hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly, or a medically significant event — did occur after the cutoff period and before the FDA advisory meeting where emergency authorization was recommended.

    During the first 33 weeks of the Pfizer trials, 38 subjects died, according to Pfizer’s own data, although independent research by Michels et al. estimated that that number is only approximately 17% of the actual projected number due to missing data.

    And after that, the rate of deaths continued to increase. Michaels et al. found Pfizer failed to report a substantial increase in the number of deaths due to cardiovascular events. They also found a consistent pattern of reporting delays on the date of the death on subjects’ case reports.

    Overall, the review authors reported that there were “twice as many cardiac deaths proportionately among vaccinated compared to unvaccinated subjects in the Pfizer trials.”

    In their discussion, the authors wrote “Based on the extended Pfizer trial findings, our person-years estimate yielded a 31% increase in overall mortality among vaccine recipients, a clear trend in the wrong direction.”

    This raises serious red flags about how the registrational trials were conducted, Mead said. “Assessments of the safety profile of the COVID-19 modified mRNA injections warrant an objective precautionary perspective, any substantial upward trend in all cause mortality within the intervention arm of the trial population reflects badly on the intervention.”

    4. Numbers of SAEs in the trials and post-rollout reporting are well-documented, despite claims to the contrary.

    Both Pfizer and Moderna found about 125 SAEs per 100,000 vaccine recipients, or one SAE for every 800 vaccines. However, because the trials excluded more vulnerable people, the authors note, even higher proportions of SAEs would be expected in the general population.

    The Fraiman et al. reanalysis of the Pfizer trial data found a significant 36% higher risk of SAEs, which included deaths and many life-threatening conditions in the vaccinated participants.

    Official SAEs for other vaccines average around only 1-2 per million. Fraiman et alestimated 1,250 SEAs per million vaccines, exceeding that benchmark by “at least 600-fold.”

    After the vaccine rollout, analyses of two large drug safety reporting systems in the U.S. and Europe identified signals for myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, cardio-respiratory arrest, cerebral infarction, and cerebral hemorrhage associated with both mRNA vaccines, along with ischemic stroke.

    And millions of AEs have been reported to those systems.

    Another study by Skidmore et al. estimated the total number of fatalities from the vaccines in 2021 alone was 289,789. Autopsy studies have also provided additional evidence of serious harms, including evidence that most COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-related deaths resulted from injury to the cardiovascular system.

    In multiple autopsy studies, German pathologist Aren Burkhardt documented the presence of vaccine-mRNA-produced spike proteins in blood vessel walls and brain tissues. This research helps to explain documented vaccine-induced toxicities affecting the nervous, immune, reproductive and other systems.

    The Pfizer data also showed an overwhelming number of adverse effects. According to a confidential document released in August 2022, Pfizer had documented approximately 1.6 million AEs affecting nearly every organ system, and one-third of them were classified as serious.

    In Pfizer’s trial, Michels and colleagues found a nearly 4-fold increase (OR 3.7, 95%CI 1.02-13.2, p = 0.03) in serious cardiac events (e.g., heart attack, acute coronary syndrome) in the vaccine group. Neither the original trial report nor Pfizer’s Summary Clinical Safety report acknowledged or commented on this safety signal.

    “The serious adverse events are all well documented,” Mead said. “Yet it’s surprising to see so many in the medical field continue to ignore or dismiss outright the latter half of the equation when considering all cause mortality trends.”

    5. The failure to appropriately test for safety and toxicity poses serious problems.

    Researchers have raised concerns that the mRNA technology is inherently unstable and difficult to store, which leads to batch variability and contamination linked to different rates of AEs.

    Recent findings by McKernan et al. that found Pfizers’ mRNA vaccines are contaminated with plasmid DNA that shouldn’t be present — and wasn’t present in the vaccines used in the trials – raising serious safety issues.

    That’s because “Process 1,” used in the trials to generate the vaccines involved in vitro transcription of synthetic DNA — essentially a “clean” process. However, that process isn’t viable for mass production, so the manufacturers used “Process 2,” which involves using E. coli bacteria to replicate the plasmids.

    Removing plasmids E coli. can result in residual plasmids in the vaccines and the effects of their presence is unknown.

    McKernan’s work also revealed the presence of DNA from simian virus 40 (SV40), an oncogenic DNA virus originally isolated in 1960 from contaminated polio vaccines, induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals, raising other safety concerns.

    Researchers from Cambridge published a paper in Nature in December 2023, where they found an inherent defect in the modified RNA instructions for the spike protein in COVID-19 immunizations that causes the machinery that translates the gene to the spike protein to “slip” about 10% of the time

    This process creates “frameshifts” that cause cells to produce “off-target” proteins in addition to the spike. These proteins, which developers either failed to look for or did not report to regulators, cause undesirable immune responses whose long-term effects are unknown.

    6. There are many different possible biological mechanisms that cause AEs and vaccine ineffectiveness.

    The review points readers to a series of papers that explain a number of different theories to explain the high number of AEs from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

    “The mechanisms of molecular mimicry, antigen cross-reactivity, pathogenic priming, viral reactivation, immune exhaustion, and other factors related to immune dysfunction all reinforce the biological plausibility for vaccine-induced pathogenesis of malignant and autoimmune diseases,” they wrote. And these mechanisms of immune activation are distinct from the body’s response to a viral infection.

    They also note the toxic effects of the primary adjuvant, PEG, and of the spike protein itself.

    They close their analysis of the vaccines with a complex explanation for the different immunological basis for protection provided by the vaccines versus natural immunity through infection. They explain the mechanisms for vaccine failure and problems generated by the ability for the mRNA vaccines to perpetuate the emergence of new variants.

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/scientists-global-moratorium-mrna-vaccines-removal-childhood-schedule/


    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/01/scientists-call-for-global-moratorium.html
    Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule A review paper published last week in the journal Cureus is the first peer-reviewed paper to call for a global moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. The authors say that reanalyzed data from the vaccine makers’ trials and high rates of serious post-injection injuries indicate the mRNA gene therapy vaccines should not have been authorized for use. Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. global moratorium mrna covid vaccine feature Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free. Governments should endorse a global moratorium on mRNA vaccines until all questions about their safety have been thoroughly investigated, according to the authors of a new, peer-reviewed article on the COVID-19 vaccine trials and the global vaccination campaign published last week in Cureus, Journal of Medical Science. Cureus is a web-based peer-reviewed open-access general medical journal using prepublication peer review. The authors surveyed published research on the pharmaceutical companies’ vaccine trials and related adverse events. They also called for the COVID-19 vaccines to be removed immediately from the childhood immunization schedule. After the first reports from vaccine trials claimed they were 95% effective in preventing COVID-19, serious problems with method, execution and reporting in the trials became public, which the paper reviewed in detail. Evidence also shows the products never underwent adequate safety and toxicological testing, and since the vaccine rollout, researchers have identified a significant number of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Authors M. Nathaniel Mead, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., Russ Wolfinger, Ph.D., Jessica Rose, Ph.D., Kris Denhaerynck, Ph.D., Steve Kirsch and Dr. Peter McCullough detailed the vaccines’ potential serious harms to humans, vaccine control and processing issues, the mechanisms behind AEs, the immunological reasons for vaccine inefficacy and the mortality data from the registrational trials. They concluded, “Federal agency approval of the COVID-19 mRNA injectable products on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits.” They also called for the vaccines to be immediately removed from the childhood immunization schedule and for the suspension of the boosters. “It is unethical and unconscionable to administer an experimental vaccine to a child who has a near-zero risk of dying from COVID-19 (IFR, 0.0003%) but a well-established 2.2% risk of permanent heart damage based on the best prospective data available,” they wrote. Finally, the authors called for a full investigation into misconduct by the pharmaceutical companies and the regulatory agencies. It is the first peer-reviewed study to call for a moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA products, Rose told The Defender. “Once a proper assessment of the safety and efficacy claims was made herein — upon which the emergency use authorization (EUA)’s and ultimate final authorizations were granted — it was found that the COVID-19 injectable products were neither safe nor effective,” she added. According to McCollough, “mRNA should never have been authorized for human use.” Lead author Mead told The Defender, “Our view is that any risk-benefit analysis must consider how much the presumed benefit in terms of reduced COVID-19 related mortality is offset by the potential increase in vaccine-induced mortality.” Here are six takeaways from the review: 1. The COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ are reclassified gene therapies that were rushed through the regulatory process in a historically unprecedented manner Before the seven-month authorization process for the mRNA vaccines, no vaccine had ever gone to market without undergoing testing of at least four years, with typical timelines averaging 10 years. To speed the process, the companies skipped preclinical studies of potential toxicity from multiple doses and cut the typical 6-12 month observation period for identifying longer-term adverse effects and the established 10-15-year period for monitoring for long-term effects such as cancer and autoimmune disorders, the authors wrote. The trials prioritized documenting effective symptom reduction over SAE and mortality. This was particularly concerning, the authors argued, because mRNA products are gene therapy products reclassified as vaccines and then given EUA for the first time ever for use against a viral disease. However, the gene therapies’ components have not been thoroughly evaluated for safety for use as vaccines. There is an uninvestigated and major concern that the mRNA could transform body cells into viral protein factories — with no off-switch — that produce the spike protein for a prolonged period causing chronic systemic inflammation and immune dysfunction. The spike protein in the vaccine, the authors said, is associated with more severe immunopathology and other AEs than the spike protein in the virus itself. The authors suggested that massive government investment in mRNA technology, including hundreds of millions before the pandemic and tens of billions once it began, meant, “U.S. federal agencies were strongly biased toward successful outcomes for the registrational trials.” The financial incentives along with political pressures to deliver a rapid solution likely influenced a series of flawed decisions that compromised the integrity of the trials and downplayed serious scientific concerns about risks with the technology, they added. RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax” Order Now 2. Steps were taken in trials to overestimate vaccine efficacy Because the trials were designed to assess whether the mRNA vaccine reduced symptoms, they did not measure whether the vaccines prevented severe disease and death. Yet the vaccine makers repeatedly claimed that they do. “No large randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials have ever demonstrated reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission, hospitalization, or death,” the authors wrote. Additionally, the number of people who contracted clinical COVID-19 in both the placebo and intervention groups was “too small to draw meaningful, pragmatic, or broad-sweeping conclusions with regard to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.” Pfizer’s 95 % efficacy claims were based on 162 of 22,000 placebo recipients contracting PCR-confirmed COVID-19 compared to eight of 22,000 in the vaccine group. None of the placebo recipients died from COVID-19. In the Moderna trials, only one placebo death was attributed to COVID-19. There was also a much larger percentage of “suspected COVID-19 cases” in both groups, with participants showing COVID-19 symptoms but a negative PCR test. When factoring in those cases, measures of vaccine efficacy drop to about 19%. The trial subject pool was comprised of largely young and healthy individuals, excluding key groups — children, pregnant women, elderly and immunocompromised people — which can also obscure the vaccine’s actual efficacy and safety. Findings from reanalyses of data from the Pfizer trials can be interpreted as showing the vaccines made “no significant difference” in reducing all-cause mortality in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups at 20 weeks into the trial, the authors wrote. Even the six-month post-marketing data Pfizer presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed no reduction in all-cause mortality from the vaccine. The authors reanalyzed that data, adjusting the analysis of deaths to better account for the fact that when Pfizer unblinded the study people from the placebo group took the vaccine, and found the vaccine group had a higher mortality rate (0.105%) than the unvaccinated group (0.0799%), which they said was a conservative estimate. One of the most glaring issues with the registrational trials, they noted, was that they exclusively focused on measuring risk reduction — the ratio of COVID-19 symptom rates in the vaccine group versus the placebo group — rather than measuring absolute risk reduction, which is the likelihood someone will show COVID-19 symptoms relative to people in the population at large. According to FDA guidelines, accounting for both approaches is crucial to avoid the misguided use of pharmaceutical products — but the data were omitted, leading to an overestimation of an intervention’s clinical utility. While both vaccines touted an approximately 95% risk reduction figure as their efficacy figure, the absolute risk reductions for Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines were 0.7% and 1.1% respectively. “A substantial number of individuals would need to be injected in order to prevent a single mild-to-moderate case of COVID-19,” the authors wrote. As an example, using a conservative estimate that 119 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent infection, and assuming that COVID-19 had a 0.23% infection fatality rate, they wrote that approximately 52,000 vaccinations would be necessary to prevent a single COVID-19-related death. However, “Given trial misconduct and data integrity problems … the true benefit is likely to be much lower,” they wrote. And, they added, one would need to assess that benefit along with harms, which they estimate to be 27 deaths per 100,000 doses of Pfizer. That means, using the most conservative estimates, “for every life saved, there were 14 times more deaths caused by the modified mRNA injections.” They also noted that post-rollout evidence confirmed the efficacy claims were overstated. For example, two large cohort Cleveland clinic studies showed the vaccine could not confer protection against COVID-19 — instead, in those trials, more vaccinated people were more likely to contract COVID-19. One study showed the risk of “breakthrough” infection was significantly higher among people who were boosted and that more vaccinations resulted in a greater risk of COVID-19. A second study showed adults who were not “up-to-date” with their shots had a 23% lower incidence of COVID-19 than their “up-to-date” colleagues. 3. The trials underestimated the adverse events, including death, despite evidence in the data. Harms were also underreported and underestimated for a number of reasons, according to the authors, a practice that tends to be common in randomized industry-sponsored vaccine trials in general and “exceptionally evident” here. First, because Pfizer unblinded the trial within just a few weeks of the emergency use authorization and allowed people in the placebo group to take the vaccine, there was not sufficient time to identify late-occurring harms because there was no longer a control group. “Was this necessary, given that none of the deaths in the Pfizer trial were attributed to COVID-19 as the primary cause, and given the very low IFR [infection fatality rate] for a relatively healthy population?” they asked. Also, trial coordinators were “haphazard” in their approach to monitoring AEs. They prioritized documenting events thought to be related to COVID-19 rather than to the vaccines for the first seven days and only recorded “unsolicited” AEs for 30-60 days. After that period, even very SAEs, like death, were not recorded. Even for the AEs recorded in the first seven days, they only solicited data from 20% of the population. None of the trial data was independently verified. “Such secrecy may have enabled the industry to more easily present an inflated and distorted estimate of the genetic injections’ benefits, along with a gross underestimation of potential harms,” they wrote. Subsequent analysis by Michels et al. revealed that deaths and other SAEs — like life-threatening conditions, inpatient hospitalization or extension of hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly, or a medically significant event — did occur after the cutoff period and before the FDA advisory meeting where emergency authorization was recommended. During the first 33 weeks of the Pfizer trials, 38 subjects died, according to Pfizer’s own data, although independent research by Michels et al. estimated that that number is only approximately 17% of the actual projected number due to missing data. And after that, the rate of deaths continued to increase. Michaels et al. found Pfizer failed to report a substantial increase in the number of deaths due to cardiovascular events. They also found a consistent pattern of reporting delays on the date of the death on subjects’ case reports. Overall, the review authors reported that there were “twice as many cardiac deaths proportionately among vaccinated compared to unvaccinated subjects in the Pfizer trials.” In their discussion, the authors wrote “Based on the extended Pfizer trial findings, our person-years estimate yielded a 31% increase in overall mortality among vaccine recipients, a clear trend in the wrong direction.” This raises serious red flags about how the registrational trials were conducted, Mead said. “Assessments of the safety profile of the COVID-19 modified mRNA injections warrant an objective precautionary perspective, any substantial upward trend in all cause mortality within the intervention arm of the trial population reflects badly on the intervention.” 4. Numbers of SAEs in the trials and post-rollout reporting are well-documented, despite claims to the contrary. Both Pfizer and Moderna found about 125 SAEs per 100,000 vaccine recipients, or one SAE for every 800 vaccines. However, because the trials excluded more vulnerable people, the authors note, even higher proportions of SAEs would be expected in the general population. The Fraiman et al. reanalysis of the Pfizer trial data found a significant 36% higher risk of SAEs, which included deaths and many life-threatening conditions in the vaccinated participants. Official SAEs for other vaccines average around only 1-2 per million. Fraiman et alestimated 1,250 SEAs per million vaccines, exceeding that benchmark by “at least 600-fold.” After the vaccine rollout, analyses of two large drug safety reporting systems in the U.S. and Europe identified signals for myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, cardio-respiratory arrest, cerebral infarction, and cerebral hemorrhage associated with both mRNA vaccines, along with ischemic stroke. And millions of AEs have been reported to those systems. Another study by Skidmore et al. estimated the total number of fatalities from the vaccines in 2021 alone was 289,789. Autopsy studies have also provided additional evidence of serious harms, including evidence that most COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-related deaths resulted from injury to the cardiovascular system. In multiple autopsy studies, German pathologist Aren Burkhardt documented the presence of vaccine-mRNA-produced spike proteins in blood vessel walls and brain tissues. This research helps to explain documented vaccine-induced toxicities affecting the nervous, immune, reproductive and other systems. The Pfizer data also showed an overwhelming number of adverse effects. According to a confidential document released in August 2022, Pfizer had documented approximately 1.6 million AEs affecting nearly every organ system, and one-third of them were classified as serious. In Pfizer’s trial, Michels and colleagues found a nearly 4-fold increase (OR 3.7, 95%CI 1.02-13.2, p = 0.03) in serious cardiac events (e.g., heart attack, acute coronary syndrome) in the vaccine group. Neither the original trial report nor Pfizer’s Summary Clinical Safety report acknowledged or commented on this safety signal. “The serious adverse events are all well documented,” Mead said. “Yet it’s surprising to see so many in the medical field continue to ignore or dismiss outright the latter half of the equation when considering all cause mortality trends.” 5. The failure to appropriately test for safety and toxicity poses serious problems. Researchers have raised concerns that the mRNA technology is inherently unstable and difficult to store, which leads to batch variability and contamination linked to different rates of AEs. Recent findings by McKernan et al. that found Pfizers’ mRNA vaccines are contaminated with plasmid DNA that shouldn’t be present — and wasn’t present in the vaccines used in the trials – raising serious safety issues. That’s because “Process 1,” used in the trials to generate the vaccines involved in vitro transcription of synthetic DNA — essentially a “clean” process. However, that process isn’t viable for mass production, so the manufacturers used “Process 2,” which involves using E. coli bacteria to replicate the plasmids. Removing plasmids E coli. can result in residual plasmids in the vaccines and the effects of their presence is unknown. McKernan’s work also revealed the presence of DNA from simian virus 40 (SV40), an oncogenic DNA virus originally isolated in 1960 from contaminated polio vaccines, induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals, raising other safety concerns. Researchers from Cambridge published a paper in Nature in December 2023, where they found an inherent defect in the modified RNA instructions for the spike protein in COVID-19 immunizations that causes the machinery that translates the gene to the spike protein to “slip” about 10% of the time This process creates “frameshifts” that cause cells to produce “off-target” proteins in addition to the spike. These proteins, which developers either failed to look for or did not report to regulators, cause undesirable immune responses whose long-term effects are unknown. 6. There are many different possible biological mechanisms that cause AEs and vaccine ineffectiveness. The review points readers to a series of papers that explain a number of different theories to explain the high number of AEs from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. “The mechanisms of molecular mimicry, antigen cross-reactivity, pathogenic priming, viral reactivation, immune exhaustion, and other factors related to immune dysfunction all reinforce the biological plausibility for vaccine-induced pathogenesis of malignant and autoimmune diseases,” they wrote. And these mechanisms of immune activation are distinct from the body’s response to a viral infection. They also note the toxic effects of the primary adjuvant, PEG, and of the spike protein itself. They close their analysis of the vaccines with a complex explanation for the different immunological basis for protection provided by the vaccines versus natural immunity through infection. They explain the mechanisms for vaccine failure and problems generated by the ability for the mRNA vaccines to perpetuate the emergence of new variants. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/scientists-global-moratorium-mrna-vaccines-removal-childhood-schedule/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/01/scientists-call-for-global-moratorium.html
    CHILDRENSHEALTHDEFENSE.ORG
    Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule
    A review paper published last week in the journal Cureus is the first peer-reviewed paper to call for a global moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. The authors say that reanalyzed data from the vaccine makers’ trials and high rates of serious post-injection injuries indicate the mRNA gene therapy vaccines should not have been authorized for use.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 18909 Views
  • Today, we must announce the last ‘Long Story Short’, as @ drbeen_medical is looking to focus more on his Dr. Been Medical Lectures channel and on building more lifesaving content there! We will continue to feature his work, and thank him for his incredible contributions!

    ...

    However, we have a surprise - TWO last episodes of 'Long Story Short' to share with you today!

    ...

    In this episode, @ drbeen_medical shares a study in which researches demonstrated that cardiac tissue infected with SARS-COV-2 can contain the virus days after infection and reactivation can occur under stress, leading to heart risks. Watch here: https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-86/

    ...

    And in this final - for now, anyway! - episode of ‘Long Story Short’, @ drbeen_medical shares a Dutch study demonstrating that in patients with # longCOVID, muscle abnormalities worsen in post-exertional malaise, and shares the clinical takeaways.

    https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-87/

    Join@Covid19_Critical
    Today, we must announce the last ‘Long Story Short’, as @ drbeen_medical is looking to focus more on his Dr. Been Medical Lectures channel and on building more lifesaving content there! We will continue to feature his work, and thank him for his incredible contributions! ... However, we have a surprise - TWO last episodes of 'Long Story Short' to share with you today! ... In this episode, @ drbeen_medical shares a study in which researches demonstrated that cardiac tissue infected with SARS-COV-2 can contain the virus days after infection and reactivation can occur under stress, leading to heart risks. Watch here: https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-86/ ... And in this final - for now, anyway! - episode of ‘Long Story Short’, @ drbeen_medical shares a Dutch study demonstrating that in patients with # longCOVID, muscle abnormalities worsen in post-exertional malaise, and shares the clinical takeaways. https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-87/ Join🔹@Covid19_Critical
    FLCCC.NET
    Long Story Short Episode 86: Persistent Viral Infection and the Risk of Heart Failure
    What are the off-target proteins produced by mRNA vaccines? Can these proteins cause harm? What is the mechanism of their production?
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 2550 Views
  • Summarize the important points that are covered in the presentation using this fully customizable key takeaways presentation slide. You can also use this PPT template to showcase the key insights, recommendations, or next steps.
    Watch Now: https://youtu.be/bQpYYpSe6cc
    Download: https://bit.ly/3OPklq1
    #keytakeaways #presentation #presentationdesign #slides #Pptslides #pptdesign #ppt #kridhagraphics #powerpointpresentation #powerpointtemplates #powerpointdesign #PowerPointslides
    Summarize the important points that are covered in the presentation using this fully customizable key takeaways presentation slide. You can also use this PPT template to showcase the key insights, recommendations, or next steps. Watch Now: https://youtu.be/bQpYYpSe6cc Download: https://bit.ly/3OPklq1 #keytakeaways #presentation #presentationdesign #slides #Pptslides #pptdesign #ppt #kridhagraphics #powerpointpresentation #powerpointtemplates #powerpointdesign #PowerPointslides
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3612 Views
  • Today, we must announce the last ‘Long Story Short’, as @ drbeen_medical is looking to focus more on his Dr. Been Medical Lectures channel and on building more lifesaving content there! We will continue to feature his work, and thank him for his incredible contributions!

    ...

    However, we have a surprise - TWO last episodes of 'Long Story Short' to share with you today!

    ...

    In this episode, @ drbeen_medical shares a study in which researches demonstrated that cardiac tissue infected with SARS-COV-2 can contain the virus days after infection and reactivation can occur under stress, leading to heart risks. Watch here: https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-86/

    ...

    And in this final - for now, anyway! - episode of ‘Long Story Short’, @ drbeen_medical shares a Dutch study demonstrating that in patients with # longCOVID, muscle abnormalities worsen in post-exertional malaise, and shares the clinical takeaways.

    https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-87/

    Join@Covid19_Critical
    Today, we must announce the last ‘Long Story Short’, as @ drbeen_medical is looking to focus more on his Dr. Been Medical Lectures channel and on building more lifesaving content there! We will continue to feature his work, and thank him for his incredible contributions! ... However, we have a surprise - TWO last episodes of 'Long Story Short' to share with you today! ... In this episode, @ drbeen_medical shares a study in which researches demonstrated that cardiac tissue infected with SARS-COV-2 can contain the virus days after infection and reactivation can occur under stress, leading to heart risks. Watch here: https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-86/ ... And in this final - for now, anyway! - episode of ‘Long Story Short’, @ drbeen_medical shares a Dutch study demonstrating that in patients with # longCOVID, muscle abnormalities worsen in post-exertional malaise, and shares the clinical takeaways. https://flccc.net/courses/long-story-short-with-dr-been/lessons/long-story-short-episode-87/ Join🔹@Covid19_Critical
    FLCCC.NET
    Long Story Short Episode 86: Persistent Viral Infection and the Risk of Heart Failure
    What are the off-target proteins produced by mRNA vaccines? Can these proteins cause harm? What is the mechanism of their production?
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 2324 Views
  • The Year that Expertise Collapsed
    Jeffrey A. Tucker
    Getting sick and getting well is part of the human experience at all times in all places. As with other phenomena of human existence, that suggests there is a great deal of embedded knowledge on the topic woven into the fabric of our lives. We aren’t born knowing but we come to know: from our moms and dads, experience of siblings and others, from our own experience, and from medical professionals who deal with the problem daily.

    In a healthy and functioning society, the path toward maintaining personal and public health becomes embedded in the cultural firmament, just like manners, belief systems, and value preferences. It’s not necessary that we think about it constantly; instead it becomes a habit, with much of the knowledge tacit; that is, deployed daily but rarely with full cognizance.

    We could know for certain that there had been a change in the matrix in March 2020 because, seemingly out of nowhere, all of this knowledge was deemed wrong. A new gaggle of experts was in charge, one day to the next. Suddenly, they were everywhere. They were on TV, quoted by all the newspapers, amplified on social media, and on the phone constantly with local officials instructing them on how they must shut down the schools, businesses, playgrounds, churches, and civic gatherings.

    The message was always the same. This time is completely different from anything in our experience or in any previous experience. This time we must adopt a totally new and completely untested paradigm. It comes from models that high-level scientists have deemed correct. It comes from labs. It comes from “germ games” of which none of us are part. If we dare to reject the new teachings for the old, we are doing it wrong. We are the malicious ones. We deserve ridicule, cancellation, silencing, exclusion, and worse.

    It felt like a coup d’etat of sorts. It certainly was an intellectual coup. All wisdom of the past, even that known by public health only months earlier, was deleted from public spaces. Dissent was silenced. Corporate media was absolutely united in celebrating the greatness of people like Fauci, who spoke in strangely circuitous ways that contradicted everything we thought we knew.

    It was exceedingly strange because the people we thought might have stood up to the flash imposition of tyranny somehow vanished. We could hardly meet with others at all, if only to share intuitions that something was wrong. “Social distancing” was more than a method to “slow the spread;” it amounted to comprehensive control of the public mind too.

    The experts instructing us spoke with astonishing certainty about precisely how society should be managed in a pandemic. There were scientific papers, tens of thousands of them, and the storm of credentials was everywhere and out of control. Unless you had a university or lab affiliation and unless you had multiple high-level degrees attached to your name, you could not get a hearing. Folk wisdom was out of the question, even basic things like “sun and outdoors are good for respiratory infections.” Even popular understanding of natural immunity came in for hard ridicule.

    Later it turned out that even top credentialed experts would not be taken seriously if they had the wrong views. This is when the racket became incredibly obvious. It was never really about genuine knowledge. It was about compliance and echoing the approved line. It’s astonishing how many people went along, even with the stupidest of the mandates, such as the distancing stickers everywhere, the ubiquity of Plexiglas, and the dirty masks on every face which were somehow believed to keep people healthy.

    Once the contrary studies started coming out, we would share them and get shouted down. The comment sections of the studies started to be raided by partisan experts who would hone in on small issues and problems and demand and obtain takedowns. Then the contrarian expert would get doxxed, his dean notified, and the faculty turned against the person, lest the department risk funding from Big Pharma or Fauci in the future.

    All the while, we kept thinking that there must be some rationale behind all this madness. It never emerged. It was all intimidation and belligerence and nothing more – arbitrary diktat by big shots who were pretending the entire time.

    The lockdowners and shot mandators were never intellectually serious people. They never much thought about the implications or ramifications of what they were doing. They were just wrecking things mostly for pecuniary gain, job protection, and career advancement, plus it was fun to be in charge. It’s not much more complicated than that.

    In other words, we’ve gradually come to realize that our worst fears were true. All these experts were and are fakes. There have been some hints along the way, such as when North Carolina Health Director Mandy Cohen (now head of the CDC) reported that she and her colleagues were burning up the phone lines to decide whether people should be allowed to participate in sports.

    “She was like, are you gonna let them have professional football?” she said. “And I was like, no. And she’s like, OK neither are we.”

    Another candid moment came five months ago, only recently unearthed by X, when NIH head Francis Collins admitted that he and his colleagues attached “zero value” to whether and to what extent they were disrupting lives, wrecking the economy, and destroying education for kids. He actually said this.

    As it turns out, these experts who ruled our lives, and still do to a great extent, were never what they claimed to be, and never actually possessed knowledge that was superior to what existed within the cultural firmament of society. Instead, all they really had was power and a grand opportunity to play dictator.

    It’s astonishing, truly, and worthy of deep study, when you consider the extent to which and for how long this class of people were able to maintain the illusion of consensus within their ranks. They bamboozled the media all over the world. They tricked vast swaths of the population. They bent all social media algorithms to reflect their views and priorities.

    One explanation comes down to the money trail. That’s a powerful explanation. But it is not the whole of it. Behind the illusion was a terrifying intellectual isolation in which all these people found themselves. They never really encountered people who disagreed. Indeed, part of the way these people had come to conceive of their jobs was to master the art of knowing what to think and when and how. It’s part of the job training to enter the class of experts: mastering the skill of echoing the opinions of others.

    Discovering this to be true is alarming for anyone who holds to older ideals of how intellectual society should conduct itself. We like to imagine that there is a constant clash of ideas, a burning desire to get to the truth, a love of knowledge and data, a passion for gaining a better understanding. That requires, above all else, an openness of mind and a willingness to listen. All of this was overtly and explicitly shut down in March 2020 but it was made easier because all the mechanisms were already in place.

    One of the best books of our time is Tom Harrington’s The Treason of the Experts, published by Brownstone. There is simply not in the present era a more insightful investigation and deconstruction of the sociological sickness of the expert class. Every page is on fire with insight and observation about the intellectual juntas that attempt to rule the public mind in today’s world. It’s a terrifying look at how wildly wrong everything has gone in the world of ideas. A great followup volume is Ramesh Thakur’s Our Enemy, the Government, which reveals all the ways in which the new scientists who were ruling the world weren’t scientific at all.

    Brownstone was born in the midst of the worst of this world. We set out to create something different, not a bubble of ideological/partisan attachment or an enforcement organ of the proper way to think about all issues. Instead, we sought to become a genuine society of thinkers united in a principled attachment to freedom but hugely diverse in specialization and philosophical outlook. It’s one of the few centers where there is genuine interdisciplinary engagement and openness to new perspectives and outlook. All of this is essential to the life of the mind and yet nearly absent in academia, media, and government today.

    We’ve put together a fascinating model for retreats. We choose a comfortable venue where the food and drink are provided and the living quarters are excellent, and bring together 40 or so top experts to present a set of ideas to the whole group. Each speaker gets 15 minutes and that is followed by 15 minutes of engagement from everyone present. Then we go to the next speaker. This goes on all day and the evenings are spent in casual conversation. As the organizer, Brownstone does not pick topics or speakers but rather allows the flow of ideas to emerge organically. This goes on for two and a half days. There is no set agenda, no mandated takeaways, no required action items. There is only unconstrained idea generation and sharing.

    There is a reason why there is such a clamor to attend. It’s the creation of something that all these wonderful people – each person a dissident in his own field – had hoped to encounter in professional life but the reality was always elusive. It’s only three days so hardly Ancient Greece or Vienna in the interwar years but it is an excellent start, and hugely productive and uplifting. It’s amazing what can happen when you combine intelligence, erudition, open minds, and sincere sharing of ideas. From the point of view of government, huge corporations, academia, and all the architects of today’s world of ideas, this is precisely what they do not want.

    The difference between 2023 and, say, five years ago, is that the expertise racket is now out in the open. Vast swaths of society decided to trust the experts for a time. They deployed every power of the state, along with all affiliated institutions in the pseudo-private sector, to browbeat and manipulate the people into panicked compliance with preposterous antics that never had any hope of mitigating disease.

    Look where that got us. The experts have been fully discredited. Is it any wonder that ever more people are skeptical of the same gang’s claims about climate change, diversity, immigration, inflation, education, gender transitions, or anything else pushed today by elite minds? Mass compliance has been replaced by mass incredulity. Trust will not likely return in our lifetimes.

    There is, further, a reason why hardly anyone is surprised that the president of Harvard stands accused of rampant plagiarism or that election officials are deploying sneaky forms of lawfare to keep political renegades off the ballot or that money launderers for the administrative state are getting away with rampant fraud. Graft, kickbacks, bribery, misappropriation, nepotism, favoritism, and outright corruption rule the day in all elite circles.

    In a few weeks, we are going to hear from Anthony Fauci, who will be grilled by a House of Representatives committee on exactly how he claimed to be so sure that there was no lab leak stemming from gain-of-function research being done at a US-baked lab in Wuhan. We’ll see how much attention this testimony gets but, truly, does anyone really believe that he is going to be honest and forthcoming? It is pretty much a consensus these days that he has been up to no good. If he is “the science,” science itself is in grave trouble.

    What a contrast to just a few years ago when Fauci-themed shirts and coffee mugs were big-selling items. He claimed to be the science, and science did rally behind him as if he had all the answers, even though what he advocated contradicted every bit of common wisdom that has always been practiced in every civilized society.

    Three years ago, the expert class went out on the farthest limb one can imagine, daring to replace all social knowledge and embedded cultural experience with their off-the-cuff rationalism and scientistic razzmatazz that ended up serving the industrial interests of large-scale exploiters in tech, media, and pharma. We live in the midst of the rubble they created. It’s no wonder they have been completely discredited.

    To replace them – and this is a long-term strategy and one that unfolds gradually with bold efforts such as that undertaken by Brownstone Institute – we need a new and serious effort to rebuild serious thought based on honesty, sincere engagement across ideological lines, and a genuine commitment to truth and freedom. We have that opportunity right now, and we dare not decline to take up the task with every sense of urgency and passion. As always, your support of our work is greatly appreciated.

    Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
    For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

    Author

    Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

    View all posts
    Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work.

    https://brownstone.org/articles/the-year-that-expertise-collapsed/
    The Year that Expertise Collapsed Jeffrey A. Tucker Getting sick and getting well is part of the human experience at all times in all places. As with other phenomena of human existence, that suggests there is a great deal of embedded knowledge on the topic woven into the fabric of our lives. We aren’t born knowing but we come to know: from our moms and dads, experience of siblings and others, from our own experience, and from medical professionals who deal with the problem daily. In a healthy and functioning society, the path toward maintaining personal and public health becomes embedded in the cultural firmament, just like manners, belief systems, and value preferences. It’s not necessary that we think about it constantly; instead it becomes a habit, with much of the knowledge tacit; that is, deployed daily but rarely with full cognizance. We could know for certain that there had been a change in the matrix in March 2020 because, seemingly out of nowhere, all of this knowledge was deemed wrong. A new gaggle of experts was in charge, one day to the next. Suddenly, they were everywhere. They were on TV, quoted by all the newspapers, amplified on social media, and on the phone constantly with local officials instructing them on how they must shut down the schools, businesses, playgrounds, churches, and civic gatherings. The message was always the same. This time is completely different from anything in our experience or in any previous experience. This time we must adopt a totally new and completely untested paradigm. It comes from models that high-level scientists have deemed correct. It comes from labs. It comes from “germ games” of which none of us are part. If we dare to reject the new teachings for the old, we are doing it wrong. We are the malicious ones. We deserve ridicule, cancellation, silencing, exclusion, and worse. It felt like a coup d’etat of sorts. It certainly was an intellectual coup. All wisdom of the past, even that known by public health only months earlier, was deleted from public spaces. Dissent was silenced. Corporate media was absolutely united in celebrating the greatness of people like Fauci, who spoke in strangely circuitous ways that contradicted everything we thought we knew. It was exceedingly strange because the people we thought might have stood up to the flash imposition of tyranny somehow vanished. We could hardly meet with others at all, if only to share intuitions that something was wrong. “Social distancing” was more than a method to “slow the spread;” it amounted to comprehensive control of the public mind too. The experts instructing us spoke with astonishing certainty about precisely how society should be managed in a pandemic. There were scientific papers, tens of thousands of them, and the storm of credentials was everywhere and out of control. Unless you had a university or lab affiliation and unless you had multiple high-level degrees attached to your name, you could not get a hearing. Folk wisdom was out of the question, even basic things like “sun and outdoors are good for respiratory infections.” Even popular understanding of natural immunity came in for hard ridicule. Later it turned out that even top credentialed experts would not be taken seriously if they had the wrong views. This is when the racket became incredibly obvious. It was never really about genuine knowledge. It was about compliance and echoing the approved line. It’s astonishing how many people went along, even with the stupidest of the mandates, such as the distancing stickers everywhere, the ubiquity of Plexiglas, and the dirty masks on every face which were somehow believed to keep people healthy. Once the contrary studies started coming out, we would share them and get shouted down. The comment sections of the studies started to be raided by partisan experts who would hone in on small issues and problems and demand and obtain takedowns. Then the contrarian expert would get doxxed, his dean notified, and the faculty turned against the person, lest the department risk funding from Big Pharma or Fauci in the future. All the while, we kept thinking that there must be some rationale behind all this madness. It never emerged. It was all intimidation and belligerence and nothing more – arbitrary diktat by big shots who were pretending the entire time. The lockdowners and shot mandators were never intellectually serious people. They never much thought about the implications or ramifications of what they were doing. They were just wrecking things mostly for pecuniary gain, job protection, and career advancement, plus it was fun to be in charge. It’s not much more complicated than that. In other words, we’ve gradually come to realize that our worst fears were true. All these experts were and are fakes. There have been some hints along the way, such as when North Carolina Health Director Mandy Cohen (now head of the CDC) reported that she and her colleagues were burning up the phone lines to decide whether people should be allowed to participate in sports. “She was like, are you gonna let them have professional football?” she said. “And I was like, no. And she’s like, OK neither are we.” Another candid moment came five months ago, only recently unearthed by X, when NIH head Francis Collins admitted that he and his colleagues attached “zero value” to whether and to what extent they were disrupting lives, wrecking the economy, and destroying education for kids. He actually said this. As it turns out, these experts who ruled our lives, and still do to a great extent, were never what they claimed to be, and never actually possessed knowledge that was superior to what existed within the cultural firmament of society. Instead, all they really had was power and a grand opportunity to play dictator. It’s astonishing, truly, and worthy of deep study, when you consider the extent to which and for how long this class of people were able to maintain the illusion of consensus within their ranks. They bamboozled the media all over the world. They tricked vast swaths of the population. They bent all social media algorithms to reflect their views and priorities. One explanation comes down to the money trail. That’s a powerful explanation. But it is not the whole of it. Behind the illusion was a terrifying intellectual isolation in which all these people found themselves. They never really encountered people who disagreed. Indeed, part of the way these people had come to conceive of their jobs was to master the art of knowing what to think and when and how. It’s part of the job training to enter the class of experts: mastering the skill of echoing the opinions of others. Discovering this to be true is alarming for anyone who holds to older ideals of how intellectual society should conduct itself. We like to imagine that there is a constant clash of ideas, a burning desire to get to the truth, a love of knowledge and data, a passion for gaining a better understanding. That requires, above all else, an openness of mind and a willingness to listen. All of this was overtly and explicitly shut down in March 2020 but it was made easier because all the mechanisms were already in place. One of the best books of our time is Tom Harrington’s The Treason of the Experts, published by Brownstone. There is simply not in the present era a more insightful investigation and deconstruction of the sociological sickness of the expert class. Every page is on fire with insight and observation about the intellectual juntas that attempt to rule the public mind in today’s world. It’s a terrifying look at how wildly wrong everything has gone in the world of ideas. A great followup volume is Ramesh Thakur’s Our Enemy, the Government, which reveals all the ways in which the new scientists who were ruling the world weren’t scientific at all. Brownstone was born in the midst of the worst of this world. We set out to create something different, not a bubble of ideological/partisan attachment or an enforcement organ of the proper way to think about all issues. Instead, we sought to become a genuine society of thinkers united in a principled attachment to freedom but hugely diverse in specialization and philosophical outlook. It’s one of the few centers where there is genuine interdisciplinary engagement and openness to new perspectives and outlook. All of this is essential to the life of the mind and yet nearly absent in academia, media, and government today. We’ve put together a fascinating model for retreats. We choose a comfortable venue where the food and drink are provided and the living quarters are excellent, and bring together 40 or so top experts to present a set of ideas to the whole group. Each speaker gets 15 minutes and that is followed by 15 minutes of engagement from everyone present. Then we go to the next speaker. This goes on all day and the evenings are spent in casual conversation. As the organizer, Brownstone does not pick topics or speakers but rather allows the flow of ideas to emerge organically. This goes on for two and a half days. There is no set agenda, no mandated takeaways, no required action items. There is only unconstrained idea generation and sharing. There is a reason why there is such a clamor to attend. It’s the creation of something that all these wonderful people – each person a dissident in his own field – had hoped to encounter in professional life but the reality was always elusive. It’s only three days so hardly Ancient Greece or Vienna in the interwar years but it is an excellent start, and hugely productive and uplifting. It’s amazing what can happen when you combine intelligence, erudition, open minds, and sincere sharing of ideas. From the point of view of government, huge corporations, academia, and all the architects of today’s world of ideas, this is precisely what they do not want. The difference between 2023 and, say, five years ago, is that the expertise racket is now out in the open. Vast swaths of society decided to trust the experts for a time. They deployed every power of the state, along with all affiliated institutions in the pseudo-private sector, to browbeat and manipulate the people into panicked compliance with preposterous antics that never had any hope of mitigating disease. Look where that got us. The experts have been fully discredited. Is it any wonder that ever more people are skeptical of the same gang’s claims about climate change, diversity, immigration, inflation, education, gender transitions, or anything else pushed today by elite minds? Mass compliance has been replaced by mass incredulity. Trust will not likely return in our lifetimes. There is, further, a reason why hardly anyone is surprised that the president of Harvard stands accused of rampant plagiarism or that election officials are deploying sneaky forms of lawfare to keep political renegades off the ballot or that money launderers for the administrative state are getting away with rampant fraud. Graft, kickbacks, bribery, misappropriation, nepotism, favoritism, and outright corruption rule the day in all elite circles. In a few weeks, we are going to hear from Anthony Fauci, who will be grilled by a House of Representatives committee on exactly how he claimed to be so sure that there was no lab leak stemming from gain-of-function research being done at a US-baked lab in Wuhan. We’ll see how much attention this testimony gets but, truly, does anyone really believe that he is going to be honest and forthcoming? It is pretty much a consensus these days that he has been up to no good. If he is “the science,” science itself is in grave trouble. What a contrast to just a few years ago when Fauci-themed shirts and coffee mugs were big-selling items. He claimed to be the science, and science did rally behind him as if he had all the answers, even though what he advocated contradicted every bit of common wisdom that has always been practiced in every civilized society. Three years ago, the expert class went out on the farthest limb one can imagine, daring to replace all social knowledge and embedded cultural experience with their off-the-cuff rationalism and scientistic razzmatazz that ended up serving the industrial interests of large-scale exploiters in tech, media, and pharma. We live in the midst of the rubble they created. It’s no wonder they have been completely discredited. To replace them – and this is a long-term strategy and one that unfolds gradually with bold efforts such as that undertaken by Brownstone Institute – we need a new and serious effort to rebuild serious thought based on honesty, sincere engagement across ideological lines, and a genuine commitment to truth and freedom. We have that opportunity right now, and we dare not decline to take up the task with every sense of urgency and passion. As always, your support of our work is greatly appreciated. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/the-year-that-expertise-collapsed/
    BROWNSTONE.ORG
    The Year that Expertise Collapsed ⋆ Brownstone Institute
    To replace the expert class, we need a new and serious effort to rebuild serious thought based on honesty, sincere engagement across ideological lines, and a genuine commitment to truth and freedom. We have that opportunity right now, and we dare not decline to take up the task with every sense of urgency and passion. As always, your support of our work is greatly appreciated.
    1 Comments 0 Shares 30740 Views
  • develop a budget & day trading course for me
    Mr. computer!!!

    Sure, I can provide you with a general outline for developing a budget and day trading course:

    *Introduction to Budgeting and Day Trading:

    *Course objectives and overview
    Importance of budgeting and day trading
    Basic concepts and terminology
    Creating a Personal Budget:

    *Setting financial goals
    Tracking income and expenses
    Creating a budget plan
    Managing debt and savings
    Introduction to Day Trading:

    *What is day trading?
    Understanding the stock market
    Risks and rewards of day trading
    Different types of day trading strategies
    Technical Analysis for Day Trading:

    *Chart patterns and indicators
    Candlestick charts and trend analysis
    Moving averages and oscillators
    Trading psychology and discipline
    Fundamental Analysis for Day Trading:

    *Analyzing company financials and economic data
    News and events affecting the market
    Industry and sector analysis
    Understanding market sentiment and momentum
    Risk Management for Day Trading:

    *Setting stop-loss orders and risk limits
    Identifying and managing risk factors
    Portfolio diversification and asset allocation
    Hedging strategies and options trading
    Trading Platforms and Tools:

    *Popular trading platforms and software
    Charting and analysis tools
    Order types and execution
    Real-time data and news sources
    Putting It All Together:

    *Creating a personalized day trading plan
    Implementing a budgeting and trading routine
    Managing emotions and staying focused
    Developing a long-term trading strategy
    Conclusion and Resources:

    *Review of key concepts and takeaways
    Additional resources and recommended readings
    Continuing education and professional development opportunities

    This is just a general outline and you can modify and customize it based on your target audience and specific course goals. It's also important to ensure that you provide plenty of examples, case studies, and practical exercises throughout the course to help learners apply what they've learned in real-life situations.
    develop a budget & day trading course for me Mr. computer!!! Sure, I can provide you with a general outline for developing a budget and day trading course: *Introduction to Budgeting and Day Trading: *Course objectives and overview Importance of budgeting and day trading Basic concepts and terminology Creating a Personal Budget: *Setting financial goals Tracking income and expenses Creating a budget plan Managing debt and savings Introduction to Day Trading: *What is day trading? Understanding the stock market Risks and rewards of day trading Different types of day trading strategies Technical Analysis for Day Trading: *Chart patterns and indicators Candlestick charts and trend analysis Moving averages and oscillators Trading psychology and discipline Fundamental Analysis for Day Trading: *Analyzing company financials and economic data News and events affecting the market Industry and sector analysis Understanding market sentiment and momentum Risk Management for Day Trading: *Setting stop-loss orders and risk limits Identifying and managing risk factors Portfolio diversification and asset allocation Hedging strategies and options trading Trading Platforms and Tools: *Popular trading platforms and software Charting and analysis tools Order types and execution Real-time data and news sources Putting It All Together: *Creating a personalized day trading plan Implementing a budgeting and trading routine Managing emotions and staying focused Developing a long-term trading strategy Conclusion and Resources: *Review of key concepts and takeaways Additional resources and recommended readings Continuing education and professional development opportunities This is just a general outline and you can modify and customize it based on your target audience and specific course goals. It's also important to ensure that you provide plenty of examples, case studies, and practical exercises throughout the course to help learners apply what they've learned in real-life situations.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2875 Views
  • Who’s Running the World? 8 Takeaways From This Week’s WEF Meeting. #Davos2023
    #WEFpuppets https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/wef-meeting-davos-klaus-gates/
    Who’s Running the World? 8 Takeaways From This Week’s WEF Meeting. #Davos2023 #WEFpuppets https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/wef-meeting-davos-klaus-gates/
    CHILDRENSHEALTHDEFENSE.ORG
    Who’s Running the World? 8 Takeaways From This Week’s WEF Meeting
    As the World Economic Forum today wrapped up its weeklong annual meeting of nearly 3,000 political, business, media and academic elites, The Defender identified eight key takeaways based on news reports and comments by participants and attendees.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3208 Views
  • Summarize the important points that are covered in the presentation using this fully customizable key #takeaways #presentation #slide. You can also use this #PPT template to showcase the key insights, recommendations, or next steps. Download now: Download: https://bit.ly/3OPklq1
    #keytakeaways #takeaway #powerpointpresentation #powerpointtemplates #powerpointdesign #presentationdesign #slides #Pptslides
    Summarize the important points that are covered in the presentation using this fully customizable key #takeaways #presentation #slide. You can also use this #PPT template to showcase the key insights, recommendations, or next steps. Download now: Download: https://bit.ly/3OPklq1 #keytakeaways #takeaway #powerpointpresentation #powerpointtemplates #powerpointdesign #presentationdesign #slides #Pptslides
    BIT.LY
    Key Takeaways Presentation Slide | Key Takeaways Examples
    Features: Widescreen 16:9 Replace texts as per your need "Theme" based colors Replace icons and image as per the need
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1623 Views
  • I told you all the Miami Dolphins would beat the Buffalo Bills today. But you know who else won today? My Jacksonville Jaguars beat the living daylights out of the Chargers 38-10 on the road.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2022/09/25/jacksonville-jaguars-takeaways-los-angeles-chargers-nfl-week-3/8116925001/
    I told you all the Miami Dolphins would beat the Buffalo Bills today. But you know who else won today? My Jacksonville Jaguars beat the living daylights out of the Chargers 38-10 on the road. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2022/09/25/jacksonville-jaguars-takeaways-los-angeles-chargers-nfl-week-3/8116925001/
    4 Comments 0 Shares 980 Views
  • Bitcoin, Ethereum Look Set to Retrace Before Rebounding
    Bitcoin and Ethereum are struggling to find support, while traders in the futures markets are showing signs of optimism. Such market behavior could result in a brief upswing before another retrace.
    The top crypto suffered a significant downturn after reaching a high of $48,000 on Mar. 28. Its price dropped by nearly 13%, losing more than 6,000 points in market value.
    Key Takeaways:
    *Bitcoin has dropped by nearly 13% since Mar. 28.
    *Likewise, Ethereum has incurred more than 12% in losses.
    *Both tokens are now approaching key support areas that may contain the bleeding
    Read more:
    https://cryptobriefing.com/bitcoin-ethereum-look-set-retrace-before-rebounding/?utm_source=main_feed&utm_medium=rss
    Article by: Financial Insane
    Source: Crypto briefing
    btc #eth #unpredictablemarket
    Bitcoin, Ethereum Look Set to Retrace Before Rebounding Bitcoin and Ethereum are struggling to find support, while traders in the futures markets are showing signs of optimism. Such market behavior could result in a brief upswing before another retrace. The top crypto suffered a significant downturn after reaching a high of $48,000 on Mar. 28. Its price dropped by nearly 13%, losing more than 6,000 points in market value. Key Takeaways: *Bitcoin has dropped by nearly 13% since Mar. 28. *Likewise, Ethereum has incurred more than 12% in losses. *Both tokens are now approaching key support areas that may contain the bleeding Read more: https://cryptobriefing.com/bitcoin-ethereum-look-set-retrace-before-rebounding/?utm_source=main_feed&utm_medium=rss Article by: Financial Insane Source: Crypto briefing btc #eth #unpredictablemarket
    3 Comments 0 Shares 1305 Views
  • https://twitter.com/Utah_Football/status/1462244751944470532?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1462244751944470532%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbssports.com%2Fcollege-football%2Fnews%2Foregon-vs-utah-score-takeaways-no-23-utes-dominate-no-3-ducks-pac-12-again-out-of-playoff-picture%2Flive%2F
    https://twitter.com/Utah_Football/status/1462244751944470532?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1462244751944470532%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbssports.com%2Fcollege-football%2Fnews%2Foregon-vs-utah-score-takeaways-no-23-utes-dominate-no-3-ducks-pac-12-again-out-of-playoff-picture%2Flive%2F
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1364 Views
  • How To Buy Tokens Using Local Currencies On Binance

    https://www.binance.com/en/markets?ref=35339321


    Main Takeaways
    There are many ways to earn money with crypto, but one of the simplest ways involves using the Binance P2P product in tandem with Binance Earn.

    https://www.binance.com/en/markets?ref=35339321

    Binance P2P lets users buy and sell cryptocurrencies directly with other users, while Binance Earn allows new and experienced crypto users to easily earn money on their existing crypto assets.

    There are many ways to generate passive income with Binance Earn, from savings products with flexible and locked terms to more advanced products including DeFi staking, automated market makers (AMMs) and more.

    Binance users can transfer crypto assets from Binance Earn to Binance P2P and sell their crypto assets easily in exchange for their preferred local currency.
    There are several ways to buy cryptocurrencies on Binance. Follow these instructions if you want to buy tokens with USD.
    1. https://www.binance.com/en/markets?ref=35339321
    Visit the Binance homepage. If you are already registered on the exchange, just log into your account and go directly to step 4. If you don’t have an account, click on the “Register” button.
    2. Enter your email address and create a secure password. Then read the license agreement and click on “Register”.
    3. Now you need to verify your identity and set up a convenient payment method.
    4. Click on “Buy Crypto” and then on the “P2P Trading” button.
    5. Click on the “Buy” button, then select the coin you are interested in. Set the values you need in the “Price” and “Payment” filters. After the list of offers appears on the screen, select the desired offer and click on “Buy”.
    6. Enter the amount in the original currency or the desired amount of crypto and click on “Buy”.
    7. The details of the operation will appear on the screen. Confirm the amount and method of payment.
    8. The seller completes his end of the deal and the transaction is completed.
    As you can see, Binance P2P is very simple to use. In case of any unforeseen circumstances or questions about the transaction, you can use the chat window to communicate directly with the buyer. If you want to buy cryptocurrencies using a credit card, you need to go back to step 4 and select “Credit / Debit Card”.

    Next, enter the amount of fiat you want to spend on the purchase, and the system will automatically calculate the number of tokens you can buy. Then click on “Add New Card”.
    Next, enter your card details and billing address, then confirm the information. You will be redirected to your bank page to complete the payment. Just follow the instructions there.
    How To Buy Tokens Using Local Currencies On Binance https://www.binance.com/en/markets?ref=35339321 Main Takeaways There are many ways to earn money with crypto, but one of the simplest ways involves using the Binance P2P product in tandem with Binance Earn. https://www.binance.com/en/markets?ref=35339321 Binance P2P lets users buy and sell cryptocurrencies directly with other users, while Binance Earn allows new and experienced crypto users to easily earn money on their existing crypto assets. There are many ways to generate passive income with Binance Earn, from savings products with flexible and locked terms to more advanced products including DeFi staking, automated market makers (AMMs) and more. Binance users can transfer crypto assets from Binance Earn to Binance P2P and sell their crypto assets easily in exchange for their preferred local currency. There are several ways to buy cryptocurrencies on Binance. Follow these instructions if you want to buy tokens with USD. 1. https://www.binance.com/en/markets?ref=35339321 Visit the Binance homepage. If you are already registered on the exchange, just log into your account and go directly to step 4. If you don’t have an account, click on the “Register” button. 2. Enter your email address and create a secure password. Then read the license agreement and click on “Register”. 3. Now you need to verify your identity and set up a convenient payment method. 4. Click on “Buy Crypto” and then on the “P2P Trading” button. 5. Click on the “Buy” button, then select the coin you are interested in. Set the values you need in the “Price” and “Payment” filters. After the list of offers appears on the screen, select the desired offer and click on “Buy”. 6. Enter the amount in the original currency or the desired amount of crypto and click on “Buy”. 7. The details of the operation will appear on the screen. Confirm the amount and method of payment. 8. The seller completes his end of the deal and the transaction is completed. As you can see, Binance P2P is very simple to use. In case of any unforeseen circumstances or questions about the transaction, you can use the chat window to communicate directly with the buyer. If you want to buy cryptocurrencies using a credit card, you need to go back to step 4 and select “Credit / Debit Card”. Next, enter the amount of fiat you want to spend on the purchase, and the system will automatically calculate the number of tokens you can buy. Then click on “Add New Card”. Next, enter your card details and billing address, then confirm the information. You will be redirected to your bank page to complete the payment. Just follow the instructions there.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 4076 Views