In a July 16, 2021, White House press instruct, 1 press secretary Jen Psaki acknowledged the Biden Administration is violating the First Amendment by alerting social media companies to posts and reports it believes is peddling “misinformation” about COVID injections. When asked by a reporter to expound on how this falter labor, Psaki said 😛 TAGEND

“Well, I would say firstly, it shouldn’t come as any surprise that we’re in regular touch with social media pulpits — just like we’re in regular contacts with all of you and your media outlets — about areas where we have concern, information that might be useful, information that may or may not be interesting to your viewers …

So we are regularly acquire sure social media pulpits are aware of the latest narrations risky to public health that we and many other Americans realizing … And we work to engage with them to better understand the enforcement of social media scaffold policies.

So let me give you an example, really to illustrate it a little bit. The incorrect narrative that remains active out there about COVID-1 9 inoculations inducing infertility … which has been disproven time and time again.

This is troubling, but a lingering narrative that we and many have seen, and we want to know that the social media scaffolds are taking steps to address it. That is inaccurate, false information … And that is an example of the kind of information that we are flagging or fostering …

So a couple of the steps that … could be constructive for the public health of the country are providing for Facebook or other stages to measure and publicly share the impact of misinformation on their platform and the public it’s reaching … with all of you to create robust enforcement policies that bridge their dimensions and render opennes about rules.

You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others if you — for yield misinformation out there.”

In her July 15, 2021, press briefing, 2 Psaki quoth “The Disinformation Dozen” report3 by the Center for Countering Digital Hate( CCDH ), which claims 65% of anti-vaccine content on Facebook and Twitter comes from 12 types, including yours truly.

According to Facebook, the government has removed 18 million poles with “COVID misinformation, ” and connected more than 2 billion customers to “reliable information, ” meaning state-sanctioned information. The Biden administration is not satisfied with these previously careening multitudes and thinks more must be done. Specifically, as Psaki mentions, they crave the “disinformation dozen” banned from all available social media platforms.

Psaki Disinforms Public About Vaccine Approval Status

In that same July 16 press briefing, Psaki too referred to the COVID shots as “approved, ” and having “gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process.”4 She said 😛 TAGEND

“The public has a right to know … And we’re dealing with a life-or-death issue here, and so everybody has a role to play in establishing sure there’s accurate information … It’s clear there are more[ paces] that can be taken …

On the foreign government piece … the State Department’s Global Engagement Center has found that Russia and China have promoted their own inoculations through messaging that erodes Western origin vaccine development platforms. So, you know, that is more than merely tournament about vaccines.

The risk and impact there is that this type of information magnifies, you are familiar with, the risk of potential side effects associated with Western vaccines. This is what they’re — what the information — some of this misinformation is doing — and misinforms the public by falsely alleging that mRNA vaccines are untested and, thus, high-risk, even though many of them are approved and have gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process.”

This is verifiably false. All currently available COVID injections are authorized for emergency use simply. They are not licensed or approved. At present, the emergency use authorization applies to adults and children as young as 12.5 Those two words, “authorized for emergency use” and “approved for use, ” are not interchangeable.

Biden Administration Launches Illegal Attack on Free Speech

One wonders whether the admission that they’re flagging posts and accountings they don’t like so that social media companies can remove them is an attempt at normalizing illegal government overreach. It comes across that way.

But let’s be clear. This kind of corporate-government collusion to censor free speech infringes the U.S. Constitution and is illegal. As noted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in an April 5, 2021, ruling6 in which he weighed in on the ability of social media giants to control free speech 😛 TAGEND

“The government cannot accomplish through menaces of untoward authority war what the Constitution prohibits it from doing instantly … Under this concept, plaintiffs might have colorable pretensions against a digital programme if it made untoward activity against them in response to government threats.”

Even if the Biden administration is not threatening social media business with adverse action if they refuse to censor at the government’s whim, the authorities concerned cannot use private companies to do something on its behalf that it is not legally allowed to do on its own.

Put another way, it is illegal for government officials to pressure private corporations into censoring free speech on their behalf or at their request, because they were as government officials do not themselves have the right to infringe on free speech.

The same exits for advocates general that have publicly called for social media companies to ban posts and deplatform notes, 7 as well as the surgeon general, Dr. Vivek Murthy, who recently used to say that an “epidemic of misinformation and disinformation” is putting people’s lives at risk. 8,9 He extremely has illegally called for “technology and social media companies to address the way misinformation and disinformation spread on their platforms.”

To that purpose, he even exhausted his own 22 -page report, 10 which admonishes addressing “misinformation super-spreaders” and using educational institutions, from elementary school settings through college, as well as private funders, to “monitor and address” false and misinforming information. The Rockefeller Foundation squandered no time in responding by announcing $13.5 million in new funding to help with the effort.

Again, these government officials have the right to their own opinion. But they do not got a right to censor other people’s opinion and/ or datum, least of all published investigate. And since they do not have the Constitutional right to censor Americans, they likewise cannot invite private companies to do it for them.

Government officials are also breaking various laws by incentivizing Americans into participating in medical experimentation, and collaborating with private companies to require personnel to participate in medical experimentation. It’s truly remarkable what’s happening, and the fact that so many laws are blatantly broken in an effort to get a needle in every arm proposes something other than public health interest is at play.

Why Is Truth About Natural Immunity Banned?

I’m still on Twitter, and in recent times, the only post deleted was one in which I indicated that naturally-infected parties developed robust and long-lasting immunity, and that state officials need to be honest and admit that this immunity is very powerful. 11

To my post, I had attached a paper1 2 be made available in the peer-review journal Nature. However, Twitter does censor me in a different sort of way by post a detailed warning to users who click on any links to Mercola.com that I announce on Twitter that inspecting my site “may be unsafe” — which is completely false.

Recovered COVID cases have robust immunity even if their indications were mild and precede antibody count is low, because latent antibody-producing cadres called reminiscence B cells for SARS-CoV-2 still are identified in their bone marrow. This was shown in another Nature study. 13,14 When they encounter the SARS-CoV-2 virus again, those recall cadres start churning out new antibodies, which will develop the level again to eliminate the virus.

The National Institute of Health’s website1 5 even declares that recovery from COVID-1 9 affords “lasting immunity, ” and that the immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-1 9 had “at least 3 out of 5 immune-system components that could be used to recognize SARS-CoV-2 up to eight months post-infection.” This research was funded in part by the NIAID, and be made available in the journal Science. 16

Clearly, the naturally-acquired immunity narrative poses a significant threat to the mass injection campaign. The knowledge poses no threat to public health. Quite the opposite. The more people know about this, the less uneasy they will feel. If they are the ones who recovered, they will know they now have good shield. If the former COVID patient is a family member or friend, they can be at ease with those people, knowing this represents no illnes risk.

If it were really about maintain beings safe from infection, natural exemption would be accepted and beings would be encouraged to look at studies presenting most situates on earth have already achieved natural immunity. But when it comes to SARS-CoV-2, they insist even all the persons who already have natural exemption should get a COVID shot. Why? They’re once immune! And there’s no added benefit to going a COVID injection if you have antibodies.

Researchers at Cleveland Clinic looked at this issue, concluding that people who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at least 42 eras prior to vaccination collected no additional protection from the punches, in addition to being their natural exemption. 17,18

Zero Benefit and All Risk for Recovered COVID Patients

Meanwhile, the COVID injection may provoke an adverse immune response in those who have already been infected with the virus, putting them at significantly increased risk of hurt and death. 19 As explained by Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a cardiac surgeon and case counselor: 20

“Viral antigens are continuing to the tissues of the naturally infected for months. When the vaccine is used too early after a natural illnes, or worse during an active infection, the inoculation force-out initiates a strong immune response that assaults the tissues where the natural viral antigens are persevering. This, I intimate, is the cause of the high level of adverse events and, likely deaths, we are seeing in the recently fouled following vaccination.”

In early March 2021, researchers at King’s College proved the validity of Noorchashm’s concerns. They detected people who have already had COVID-1 9 are three times more likely to experience inoculation side effects than those who have not been exposed to the virus, and this appears true for both mRNA and DNA versions of the vaccine. 21

Using data from the Kings College ZOE app, which has logged more than 700,000 vaccinations, 35.7% of those given the Pfizer injection who had previously been infected reported side effects, compared to simply 12.2% of those not previously infected.

Looking at the AstraZeneca vaccine, 52.7% of previously polluted had side effects, comparison with 31.9% of those who had not been previously fouled. Despite these documented risks, the FDA continues to recommend the COVID shot for those with natural immunity.

Vaccination Versus Natural Immunity

Public Health England has published data evidencing merely 44 of 6,614 previously fouled beings tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection a second time. 22 Of those 44, simply 15 developed manifestations, so it’s quite possible the remainder were simply false positives.

Either way, the risk of reinfection after recovering from a bout of COVID-1 9 seems uncommon, and the risk of reinfection is far lower than the risk of infection faced by those who are fully “vaccinated.” As reported by Israel National News, July 13, 2021:23

“Coronavirus patients who recovered from the virus were far less likely to become infected during the latest wave of the pandemic than people who were inoculated against COVID …

Health Ministry data on the tide of COVID eruptions which began this May show that Israelis with exemption from natural illnes were far less likely to become infected again in comparison to Israelis who only had immunity via vaccination.

More than 7,700 new cases of the virus have been detected during the most recent beckon starting in May, but really 72 of the established disputes were presented in people who were known to have been infected previously — that is, less than 1% of the new cases. Roughly 40% of new cases — or more than 3,000 patients — involved people who had been infected despite being vaccinated.

With a total of 835, 792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.

By contrast, Israelis who were inoculated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193, 499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were inoculated going polluted in the latest wave.”

Impossible for COVID Jabs to Have Favorable Impact

In a macrocosm of differing rulings and eternally deriving science, who can claim titles to the truth? The White House press secretary seems to think the Biden administration should have dibs on the truth, while in the same breath disinforming the public by referring to the COVID shots as FDA approved with “gold standard” safety studies behind them.

Health agencies and their officials likewise disinform the public every time they claim vaccine-induced exemption is better than natural immunity, as this runs counter to everything we’ve ever learned about virology. It may be accurate for some diseases, but it certainly cannot be said for COVID-1 9. There’s far more data suggesting the COVID jab is an unnecessary risk that caters unimportant benefit.

The overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio is just an 0.26%. Below 40 years of age, it’s 0.01%. What’s more, data shows the absolute risk reduction for all four COVID injections is between 0.7% and 1.3%. Since the ultimate likelihood that needs to be overcome is lower than the benefit that these doses can provide, mass vaccination simply cannot have a positive impact on the population. It’s mathematically impossible.

Remember, healthy adults under 50, teens and children have a less than 1% likelihood of hospitalization and extinction from COVID-1 9, so they don’t have a medical need for this experimental injection. The overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio is a mere 0.26%. Below 40 years of age, it’s 0.01%. 24 Those curious simply do not make a strong argument for mass insertion with an experimental gene modification tool.

What’s more, data show the absolute risk reduction for all four COVID injections is between 0.7% and 1.3%. 25,26( Efficacy charges of 67% to 95% all refer to the relative risk reduction .) Since the ultimate peril that needs to be overcome is lower than the benefit that these injections can provide, mass vaccination simply cannot have a favorable impact on the population. It’s mathematically impossible.

So, while government, public health leadership and pro-vaccine advocates contend we must follow the science, they themselves are doing anything but. For one and a half years, they’ve insisted pandemic measures like lockdowns, mask wearing and gene modification insertions are the only way forward, despite ridges of evidence against each and every one of those strategies.

So, it’s not about discipline. If it were, they’d produce studies that overwhelmingly refute the counternarrative and prove demonstrable benefits. But they don’t. Instead, they unleash personal attacks and smear campaigns to discourage parties from listening to anything that doesn’t come out of their information machine.

Biden Administration Wants to Monitor Your Private Texts

The Biden Administration has now gone so far as to propose SMS carriers reality check private textbook contents to make sure Americans don’t share inconvenient points to friends and family.

Ironically, White House spokesperson Kevin Munoz told Politico that this move was part of the administration’s “steadfast commitment to keep politics out of the vaccination efforts.”2 7 Backlash was swift, from legislators and “individuals ” alike, but hour will tell whether it was enough to move the White House reconsider. 28

It’s also not about public health, because if it were, they’d acquired natural exemption, and they wouldn’t be cracking the law at every turn. No, it’s all about getting a needle in every weapon — discipline, reasoning and common sense be damned. The question is why.

Many of my clauses over the past year have detailed testify pointing to this mass injection campaign being a tool to usher in a new international order of surveillance, worldwide privation and the ended removal of medical and personal freedoms.

The Biden administration’s call to censor — through public practicalities and private companionships — anyone who shares information about probabilities and the lack of benefit of these COVID injections is clearly part of that schedule, and must be dismissed on ethical, legal and Constitutional grounds.

Read more: articles.mercola.com